F-Class now has it's own Rules Book (2024)

[Florida Wally]

Anyone takes advantage of the
Bipod And/or Sling Rule

I’ve been thinking of adding a sling to my FTR setup, but I haven’t tried it. The sling would need to be counted in the 18.18lbs, so it wouldn't make weight. I still may try it, just to see if there is a benefit.

 

[BP1]

This cracked me up. I love the idea of F practical and I support it ... But still this was a pretty sick burn.

Dean always has something funny to say…never lets me down !

 

[Dave M.]

The reason we started F-Practical (idea of Bob Petillo) was for people to be able to just show up slap a bipod on a rifle and shoot and have a class they could compete in and not have to compete against the high dollar F-Open and F-T/R guns. The goal is getting people on the range. But by nature people want to compete. If they see they have to spend $4000 or more to compete it turns them away. Saw it today with a new shooters. Signed up was trying to shoot F-Open with a Cladwell rest, saw the Seb's, Rodzillas, and the other F-Open rests, then when he saw another guy shooting F-Practical he was like yup that is what I'm going to do. Which ironically what F-Class at Ft. Knox and Atterbury looked like for the first 3 or 4 years untill all the fancy gear started showing up. Are scores lower, yeah they are but people have fun, and they come out which is what we want.

F-Practical is shot on the F-Class targets for mid and long range, and it is treated as the 3rd division for F-class and we also allow suppressors if people want to run them.

Edit: Scores are lower but we have some guys that can/have shot in the mid upper 190s shooting in F-Prac in both LR and MR

People will find a way to make your simple F practical gun setups cost $10K and guess who will be complaining when those guys are winning every weekend??? Pretty soon the guys shooting $3K setups will want to win and migrate towards the $10K that demonstrate better consistency and accuracy. I’m not sure why people want to stifle the innovation and creativity of other in F class, unless it is for the obvious reason that they no longer possess the resources or the drive required to compete with best. Just my two cents and perhaps to many worth only one cent, but I can tell you when I show up to compete at an event, my goal is to outshoot everyone in my division. On the chance where someone is consistently outshooting me, you can bet I will try everything in my power to step my game up and win. Question, are the people complaining about rolling back the rules or stifling innovation the same ones that are consistently winning? I highly doubt it, because these are the people that understand if you are not working to improve your performance every day, then you are losing ground to your competitors that are nipping at your heels.
Dave

 

[Heman]

People will find a way to make your simple F practical gun setups cost $10K and guess who will be complaining when those guys are winning every weekend??? Pretty soon the guys shooting $3K setups will want to win and migrate towards the $10K that demonstrate better consistency and accuracy. I’m not sure why people want to stifle the innovation and creativity of other in F class, unless it is for the obvious reason that they no longer possess the resources or the drive required to compete with best. Just my two cents and perhaps to many worth only one cent, but I can tell you when I show up to compete at an event, my goal is to outshoot everyone in my division. On the chance where someone is consistently outshooting me, you can bet I will try everything in my power to step my game up and win. Question, are the people complaining about rolling back the rules or stifling innovation the same ones that are consistently winning? I highly doubt it, because these are the people that understand if you are not working to improve your performance every day, then you are losing ground to your competitors that are nipping at your heels.
Dave

Dave,
That is the exact type of viewpoint that leads to a thread that was on here earlier about the declining enrollment in shooting. This isn't anything about turning back rules or stifling innovation, the whole purpose is about getting people out on to the range and participating. We still run F-Open and F-T/R and some of the guys who started in F-Practical have gone there. Not sure why you got all upset here, all this is, is an avenue to get people started and get them on the range who otherwise may not want to. With limiting the front and rear rests it isn't as much of an equipment game as the traditional F-class disciplines and since its not an official NRA division highly doubt people are going to sink 10 grand into a rifle, and if that is what it costs to be competitive in F-Open (I don't know I'm a sling shooter) then you are cutting your own throats.

 

[Dimner]

People will find a way to make your simple F practical gun setups cost $10K and guess who will be complaining when those guys are winning every weekend??? Pretty soon the guys shooting $3K setups will want to win and migrate towards the $10K that demonstrate better consistency and accuracy. I’m not sure why people want to stifle the innovation and creativity of other in F class, unless it is for the obvious reason that they no longer possess the resources or the drive required to compete with best. Just my two cents and perhaps to many worth only one cent, but I can tell you when I show up to compete at an event, my goal is to outshoot everyone in my division. On the chance where someone is consistently outshooting me, you can bet I will try everything in my power to step my game up and win. Question, are the people complaining about rolling back the rules or stifling innovation the same ones that are consistently winning? I highly doubt it, because these are the people that understand if you are not working to improve your performance every day, then you are losing ground to your competitors that are nipping at your heels.
Dave

I totally get what you are saying. I'm 100% supportive of a type of competition where innovation, skill and creativity are rewarded and not stifled. Where the best can compete with the best. In fact I love all the reports about the south west nationals, I eat that up.

However, I do also think there needs to be some place where new shooters can dip their toes. I read about competitions and look at results etc (not just f-class) and the gear necessary is absolutely mind-blowing. One may think about competing, but they look at their rifle setup and realize they have what equates to an off the lot dodge charger when everyone else on the line is sporting Lamborghini, Ferrari, and other high end racers. Or maybe it's like the SWN is like Daytona 500.

Where do the Joe blows go with our go karts play? I'd like to race a few times before I get myself a pre-owned NSX. (True story, I love the NSX)

No rules should ever be made in the top end game to benefit new people or those who want rules in place to hamper innovation, but there should be a separate format for the amateur. If some weirdo wants to show up with a $15k go kart and dominate that format, he just ends up as the butt of jokes. We have all met a guy like that in one or another of our hobbies. More money than brains and even less skill.

 

[Heman]

I don't want the rules rolled back or stifled. I'm joking in many of my comments. Self-praise stinks, but I'm a qualified FTR participant.

I have access to any equipment or rifles I want, and I want to shoot a 308 on a harris bipod with a 24 inch barrel. When AR Tac came out as a provisional discipline, I built a an AR for the cause and spent a year focused on it. I really wish it picked up more steam than it did.

In short, I want an actual tactical class. There is NOTHING tactical about "F Tactical Rifle" and it bothers me.

It suprised me I figured it would have also.
We also run XTC-F Class. Which is essentially across the course off a bipod (different targets). Only really had one guy shoot it and he passed away couple years back.

 

[dakor]

To me it should be about who is the best shooter and not who has the most accurate rifle.

The rules should be Harris Bipod only with a flat rear sandbag and you have to have your hand wrapped on the grip and shoulder the rifle. This would be for both classes.

If you need a rest in the front or dont want to touch the rifle when firing go shoot benchrest or railgun. Problem solved.

 

[rardoin]

To me it should be about who is the best shooter and not who has the most accurate rifle.

It is…. The best shooter learned how to tune their gun/load and get the best out of it. Give me Tim Vaught‘s best shooting rifle and give him my average shooting rifle and he’ll beat me every time.

 

[Rocketvapor]

There's still some of us that are still trying to Master Midrange F-Open.
The rules seem fine to the Wife and I

 

[F18Dave]

3.22 a

Allows wireless communication, but can’t transmit over a radio frequency?

That limits wireless devices to Free-space Optical, sonic (ultrasonic), and electromagnetic induction.

I don’t think that paragraph means what they think it means.

 

[kzin]

I don't want the rules rolled back or stifled. I'm joking in many of my comments. Self-praise stinks, but I'm a qualified FTR participant.

I have access to any equipment or rifles I want, and I want to shoot a 308 on a harris bipod with a 24 inch barrel. When AR Tac came out as a provisional discipline, I built a an AR for the cause and spent a year focused on it. I really wish it picked up more steam than it did.

In short, I want an actual tactical class. There is NOTHING tactical about "F Tactical Rifle" and it bothers me.

What are the rules for 'F Tactical Rifle'?
You're not thinking f-tr is tactical, are you?

 

[Keith Glasscock]

3.22 a

Allows wireless communication, but can’t transmit over a radio frequency?

That limits wireless devices to Free-space Optical, sonic (ultrasonic), and electromagnetic induction.

I don’t think that paragraph means what they think it means.

It's funny, I notice the lack of rules prohibiting communication with the pits. They were in the old rulebook.

 

[Dimner]

Looks like F-practical needs a little more work in the 'awareness' area

 

[jelenko]

3.22 a

Allows wireless communication, but can’t transmit over a radio frequency?

That limits wireless devices to Free-space Optical, sonic (ultrasonic), and electromagnetic induction.

I don’t think that paragraph means what they think it means.

It also allows shouting to the pits.

 

[Rope2horns]

3.22 a

Allows wireless communication, but can’t transmit over a radio frequency?

That limits wireless devices to Free-space Optical, sonic (ultrasonic), and electromagnetic induction.

I don’t think that paragraph means what they think it means.

The whole rule...

(a) "During team matches only; team members may communicate with
each other via hard-wired or wireless communications devices. These
communication devices must not transmit over a radio frequency, and
must not interfere with safety, range operations or other competitors"

I think why wireless bluetooth headsets are allowed is because bluetooth transmits over a way lower frequency that does not "normally" interfere with standard radio communications?........is this close or am I way off track here?

 

[LVLAaron]

It's just a poorly written rule that doesn't make sense. If it's wireless it uses radio frequencies.

 

[F18Dave]

The whole rule...

(a) "During team matches only; team members may communicate with
each other via hard-wired or wireless communications devices. These
communication devices must not transmit over a radio frequency, and
must not interfere with safety, range operations or other competitors"

I think why wireless bluetooth headsets are allowed is because bluetooth transmits over a way lower frequency that does not "normally" interfere with standard radio communications?........is this close or am I way off track here?

The Frequency used by Bluetooth is in the radio frequency spectrum. The radio frequency spectrum is 3 kilohertz up to 3,000 gigahertz. Bluetooth transmits from 2400 to 2483.5 MHz (2.4 GHz). The current rule does not allow Bluetooth frequencies.

https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/spectrum_radio_graphic_web.png?resize=1536,618

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

The whole rule...

(a) "During team matches only; team members may communicate with
each other via hard-wired or wireless communications devices. These
communication devices must not transmit over a radio frequency, and
must not interfere with safety, range operations or other competitors"

I think why wireless bluetooth headsets are allowed is because bluetooth transmits over a way lower frequency that does not "normally" interfere with standard radio communications?........is this close or am I way off track here?

The walkie-talkies used in range operation use the FRS frequencies that run from 462 to 467MHz. These are unlicensed frequencies and have a transmit power limit of up to 2 watts.

Bluetooth uses the 2.4GHz frequency band with spread spectrum technology with a very low power output. Bluetooth and WiFi share the unlicensed 2.4GHz frequency band but are designed to coexist, thanks to spread spectrum tech.

So BT and FRS do not interfere with one another, and that's why BT is allowed on the line.

 

[Warren Dean]

The walkie-talkies used in range operation use the FRS frequencies that run from 462 to 467MHz. These are unlicensed frequencies and have a transmit power limit of up to 2 watts.

Bluetooth uses the 2.4GHz frequency band with spread spectrum technology with a very low power output. Bluetooth and WiFi share the unlicensed 2.4GHz frequency band but are designed to coexist, thanks to spread spectrum tech.

So BT and FRS do not interfere with one another, and that's why BT is allowed on the line.

That's exactly right. I wonder why the rule makers can't make that distinction? Just sayin'....

 

[Warren Dean]

It's just a poorly written rule that doesn't make sense. If it's wireless it uses radio frequencies.

That concept is lost on many people.