A bit off-topic but does anyone have a link to the rules for any/any? I was under the impression bipods are allowed there, but no rests, would this not be the class OP is looking for?
Personally, I dont see anything wrong with barrel blocks, I think theyre a great idea. Heres another sweet barrel block F-Open rifle:
6.5 ?Mystic? Barrel Block F-Classer within AccurateShooter.com
And the video above as well as Richard King`s rifle were both pretty obviously inspired by rail guns. Again, I dont see anything wrong with either of them. Theyre within the rules. Whats wrong with progress? This is how advancements happen is it not? I was looking at a XLR chassis rifle the other day and was thinking on why XLR didnt just make that cross-bar piece a short/miniature barrel block.. That would make it so you could use the same stock for any barreled action combo as long as your barrels are the same stock diameter. Not to mention it can make it act like a shorter barrel in regards to vibration frequency and one can tune the rifle as well by sliding the barrel back or forth in the block, fine-tuning the best load even further.
Barrel blocks also take the stress off the action so you dont have to worry about your action flexing under the weight of a long 1.25" straight cylinder barrel. I also remember reading that target shooters used to sleeve their R700s to get a flat/square bottom action, or else have to redo the bedding on their R700s every 100 or 200 rounds or so when shooting .300 Wby Mags and larger because of the torque twisting the action out of the bedding somewhat and causing a bit of a accuracy loss. Barrel blocks make this redundant. I know many will probably try to rebuke this and say their .300 Wby Mag and .300 Win Mag R700 shoots fine, but he was only talking about maybe a 1/8 min loss of accuracy or less. If youre a tactical shooter and can immediately distinguish a 1/8 min loss without it possibly attributed to something else I commend you.
Other than the barrel block, the stock does look kinda radical but I really dont see a problem. I think of BR rigs and F-Open rifles to be the shooting equivalent of dragsters(aka "rails"). Theyre only good at going extremely fast for a 1/8mi or 1/4mi but thats what theyre built to do and optimized for. Noone has any doubts that you might drive a dragster to the grocery store, or race it at Le Mans. Consequently, noone should have any doubts that you`re going to lug a 22lb F-Open or 85lb 1000yd BR Heavy Gun rifle around and try to compete with it at the Sniper`s Hide Cup.
Regarding shooting free-recoil, say what you will about it but it obviously works. Berger`s own Eric Stecker came in 2nd at the Berger SW Nat`ls, and from what I hear he was shooting free-recoil. Its not prohibited in the rules so again, I dont see a problem, even more so that its at the top of the pack. I read that a friend and Walt Berger were at the line with Mr. Stecker, and that Mr Walt Berger himself, an avid Benchrest competitor for the record, said "I cant shoot like that, I have to hold my rifles."
What Im getting at is that unless you`re shooting a 6 PPC railgun, I personally dont see shooting free-recoil as an advantage or threat to traditional shooting. It really ends up being personal preference. If your rifle will track straight and shoot straight in free-recoil, have a go at it. I dont have a rifle that will track straight from free-recoil, so I cant comment from experience but IMO with the right technique from a good bipod/rest and rear bags it wont make a difference on target. Correct me if Im wrong.
If youre wanting to create a new F-Class division, I`d take a long, hard look at the Hunter BenchRest class. That class was started so that the average hunter could bring his average deer rifle to a BR competition. The rules are 10lb weight, 6x scope, convex fore end at 2.25" wide max, action with a magazine with capacity of atleast 2 rounds, and a cartridge with atleast 45gr H2O capacity. Instead of a bunch of hunters shooting BR with hunting rifles, they ended up with "winners" as was said above, shooting purpose-built rifles and even purpose-made cartridges; namely the .30x47 HBR. Sometimes they would use .300 Savage brass and sometimes they`d use Lapua .308 brass, just depends on what chamber they chose. Different rules, but the winners still rose to the top and the rifles still ended up being built for that specific purpose, not resembling anything the creators of the class had envisioned. The only way you`re going to truly even out the equipment is standardize a rifle; ie limit what cartridges they can use to just a few options, limit stock options to just a few, limit barrel length and contour, limit action choices, etc. But then IMO that would just be NASCAR or NHRA Pro Stock with rifles. Strange because it seems with classes like those, where options are very limited and theres only a few ways to go for cylinder head configuration and the like, the race teams end up pouring exponentially more money into the program to squeak out the tiniest advantage compared to more open classes.
tl;dr: IMO barrel blocks and rail-like guns for F-Class are sweet. Nothing wrong with free-recoil shooting. Winners still win. Purpose-built rifles will always come into the fray.
Besides, we`re all here for the same reason right? That is, the pursuit of getting our rifles/ourselves shooting 5, 10, 15, 20, or more shots into one ragged hole, hopefully at the center of the target. Thats what its all about.
ETA: Heres Mr Bart talking about the bedding for R700s coming loose:
M98 mauser sleeved action project - Long Range Hunting Online Magazine
