I'd like to see a new F class Category. "F-TAC"

[Will Henry]

Quite so Boyd. What Americans have to remember is that British Commonwealth 'Target Rifle' (sling shooting) is entirely iron sights. (UK, Canada, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand.) There is the any sight 'Match Rifle' variant, but that is a minority discipline that is shot with 308 at 1,000 / 1,100 / 1,200 yards.

So UK and Commonwealth sling shooters faced enforced retirement as soon as their eyes deteriorated to the point where they couldn't get a good sight picture with conventional match aperture irons. There was no equivalent scoped rifle discipline.

George Farquarson envisaged and invented a modified TR rifle formula, basically a single shot 7.62 TR rifle continuing to meet ICFRA rules on things like (1.5kg) minimum trigger pull, and maximum weight was determined by the TR + ICFRA rifle maximum plus a Harris type bipod plus a decent target scope and still shooting on standard GB NRA / DCRA fullbore targets (2-MOA 5-ring / 1-MOA V-Bull) so that he and the many others like him could continue shooting competitively in what was a sub-class of their former discipline. TR and the new F-Class participants continued shooting mixed together as they used the same targets. (This was the case when I started in F, the only difference being that in the UK anyway, a V-Bull scored 6 points so we shot for 120 points HPS, not 100.20v.)

Since George's day, TR rules have been amended to allow optical lens type enhancements such as the Eagle Eye to apertures to extend the shooting life of older participants, but that was for the next generation of shooters, and even so many older shooters still struggle to continue.

As the discipline caught on and was adopted outside of Canada it was amended to create what we now call 'Open' class - any calibre, any trigger pull weight as long as safe, front-rest support, 22lb all-up weight. The 223 Rem and 308 Win F-Classers soon found they were hopelessly outclassed against a weird and wonderful range of very high MV / high BC cartridges with 6.5-284 soon rising to prominence. The NRA target quickly proved to be too easy - the (true) saying soon arose that the first shot that leaked out of the V-Bull into the Bull-5 ended your chance of a high match place. So, F/TR with a lower all-up weight; 223/308 only; bipod instead of frontrest was introduced and target ring diameters were halved compared to the NRA versions. The discipline morphed from Farquarson-Class into Free-Class allowing experimentation and innovation within a fairly wide set of parameters. I personally think that on balance this was the right move as F-Class has driven greater change and innovation and increased standards of precision etc far more in the last 10 years of my shooting experience than the previous 30. It also brought in younger participants who simply would never have adopted a discipline that saw them trussed up in leather jackets and saddled with a tight sling and restricted to iron sights. The downside is that higher standards / fancier kit increased costs, and not everyone wants to handload.

In the UK many clubs successfully added a factory rifle only class, but it has generally either failed after a while or been restricted to modest numbers. F-Tactical / military, call it what you like, has in the UK anyway seen greater enthusiasm, largely because the various tactical disciplines. and now PRS, have caught on in a big way and people are having very good rifles built for them, using very high quality glass etc which shoot just as well in single-shot prone comps. Many of my club's tactical shooters now have a match every weekend when you include F and even get two matches into a single day (mid range F fixtures usually have a 200/300 yard McQueens comp on a parallel range, so they book in to one match in the morning, the other in the afternoon or vice versa which we can manage with e-targets not needing large butt crews).

At the time of the origin of "F" class, there was already a class called TR-O (target rifle-optical), which was seldom contested. Also, for a period of time, there was the option of using a 4x scope instead of iron sights.
Anyway, when George envisioned "F" class, he not only wanted to extend the competition life of older shooters (most of whom did not take up "F" class, by the way), he also wanted to bring shooters from other disciplines (like me and some others) to TR venues. His hope was that some would become interested in target rifle shooting. George was not just a fine shooter but he was a rifle enthusiast. He wanted people to be able to use different cartridges (George got one of Canada's first 7mm-08's). He, Art Bourne, and Bob Hobbs were some of the early competitors. My Dad took it up just to compete with Bob Hobbs, I suspect! They were friends but competitive ones. I started shooting "F" just because I knew all of these guys (I worked with Bob Art, and George) and I had grown bored with BR. I like building rifles and this was kind of a good excuse to build more.
My first "F" class match was fired with a 6BR built on a model70 target rifle, for Bob Hobbs. I was just testing the rifle. I had only loaded enough ammunition for one day. As it happened, I was reading things pretty well that day and was well in front at the end of the day. I declined the offer of a loaner rifle from a friend and chose to leave on a high note! I then repurposed a 6.5x55 (another Model 70) I had put together for 1000 yd shooting and shot "F" for quite a while. Later, I switched to shooting TR-O (optical) and enjoy that more. "F" had become a little too much like BR without the bench.
I shot a couple of TR matches with a 4x scope but the DCRA stopped allowing that so that ended my TR efforts. I just didn't want to spend a bunch of money on iron sights when I had a drawerful of scopes.
I still believe that the original F class rules covered everything pretty well. Right now, muzzle brakes are not allowed, and I see no reason they should be. Every muzzle brake I have installed, every one I have made, was either removable or capable of being deactivated. Easy peasy.
I think even F/TR should not have happened. I think the maximum weight should simply have been reduced and that's that. I don't know if I will shoot "F" again, but if I do, I just be sure to be within the rules and enjoy the small successes as they come. WH

 

[NZ_Fclass]

NZ FPR rules:

https://www.nranz.com/assets/Rules/2020-08-17-Shooting-Rules-F-PR.pdf

 

[jxb]

Assuming something else needs to be created, NZ F-PR rules seem pretty spot on with this topic.

However it would be nice if forearm width under H is exempt when a bipod is used. Seems that would allow anyone with an otherwise qualifying F-class rifle to compete in this class.

 

[drop_point]

If you need to run a brake, go shoot PRS.

You missed the point.

 

[drop_point]

Has nothing to do with gunshots. It has to do with concussion waves to the face. If you can't handle a little recoil, try air rifle

You missed the point.

The brake isn't for recoil. Since you're such a smartass about it, I'll clue you in. You've obviously never shot PRS. The brake is invaluable for spotting shots in PRS.

People want more shooting opportunities with the rifle they ALREADY HAVE.

Attitudes like this is why shooting sports are dying.

You say "take the brake off". Well, that involves re-zero and returning. Some brakes are Rockset on. Its not that easy.

There are ways to where those terrible concussive waves you're talking about won't be a problem as outlined multiple times in the thread.

1. Put up a barrier and everybody with a brake shoots on the other side.

2. Put brake shooters on another relay.

3. Leave a couple empty lanes between them.

Strange that brake shooters don't have a problem with all these concussive waves. I guess some folks are just fragile.

 

[mgdietrich]

I disagree with you. If you don’t want to hear gunshots, stay home.

Disagree- breaks in close proximity to people trying to shoot is not enjoyable. Just screw it off? The few don’t get to change the majority…. Seems simple enough.

 

[drop_point]

Disagree- breaks in close proximity to people trying to shoot is not enjoyable. Just screw it off? The few don’t get to change the majority…. Seems simple enough.

Read the post directly above this one.

At least two people have posted on this thread how to include these shooters.

 

[mgdietrich]

Read the post directly above this one.

At least two people have posted on this thread how to include these shooters.

Yep, easy have them unscrew their break. Easiest solution that no change is needed to the match format.

 

[drop_point]

Yep, easy have them unscrew their break. Easiest solution that no change is needed to the match format.

You didn't read.

Oftentimes brakes are Rockset on.

Change the weight on the muzzle changes the tune and the zero.

 

[lal357]

id just stick all the F Tac shooters on the same relay.

ive shot matches like that they get to shoot the same relay

 

[Dgd6mm]

You didn't read.

Oftentimes brakes are Rockset on.

Change the weight on the muzzle changes the tune and the zero.

So, even if it does let the PRS rifle shooters build 2 different loads. I shoot muzzle brakes on my pdog rifles and PRS rifles. My midrange and longe range FTR rifles are to rules. Muzzle brakes do not belong in f class.

 

[mike mccormick]

You missed the point.

The brake isn't for recoil. Since you're such a smartass about it, I'll clue you in. You've obviously never shot PRS. The brake is invaluable for spotting shots in PRS.

People want more shooting opportunities with the rifle they ALREADY HAVE.

Attitudes like this is why shooting sports are dying.

You say "take the brake off". Well, that involves re-zero and returning. Some brakes are Rockset on. Its not that easy.

There are ways to where those terrible concussive waves you're talking about won't be a problem as outlined multiple times in the thread.

1. Put up a barrier and everybody with a brake shoots on the other side.

2. Put brake shooters on another relay.

3. Leave a couple empty lanes between them.

Strange that brake shooters don't have a problem with all these concussive waves. I guess some folks are just fragile.

No. You miss the point. There is no spotting impact on a paper target. Therefore your argument is pointless.

 

[drop_point]

ive shot matches like that they get to shoot the same relay

Did everybody else quit?

So, even if it does let the PRS rifle shooters build 2 different loads. I shoot muzzle brakes on my pdog rifles and PRS rifles. My midrange and longe range FTR rifles are to rules. Muzzle brakes do not belong in f class.

The rules from F-Class have changed since its inception. The OP is talking about making a new class, ie: changing the rules of F-class.

 

[drop_point]

No. You miss the point. There is no spotting impact on a paper target. Therefore your argument is pointless.

The point.



Your head.


You're saying for the guys one with rifle, they have to modify their rifle, develop a second load, and re-zero to shoot.

You're saying you don't think ranges should accommodate shooters. It doesn't hurt you in any way whatsoever.

Many ranges DO take care of these shooters and it doesn't disturb anybody.

 

[mike mccormick]

The point.



Your head.


You're saying for the guys one with rifle, they have to modify their rifle, develop a second load, and re-zero to shoot.

You're saying you don't think ranges should accommodate shooters. It doesn't hurt you in any way whatsoever.

Many ranges DO take care of these shooters and it doesn't disturb anybody.

Having shot on a crowded firing line at s range that allowed use of brakes, yes it affects my day. It developed a flinch that took months to get rid of. The nra does not allow brakes in any discipline for a reason. It is your spoiled attitude that is the problem here. The rules clearly state that brakes are not allowed. If you want to shoot F class, follow the rules, don't whine until you get your way.

 

[Will Henry]

As I mentioned earlier, If the thread protector is made to be the same weight as the brake, the effects of switching are minimal. I have built integral brakes which were not, of course, removable. For these, I made an insert which shut off the brake.
The thing is, if a person wants to shoot in a certain discipline, he has to use equipment which will fit into the rules for that discipline. If that means re-tuning and adjusting the scope, it just adds to the challenge! WH

 

[drop_point]

Having shot on a crowded firing line at s range that allowed use of brakes, yes it affects my day. It developed a flinch that took months to get rid of. The nra does not allow brakes in any discipline for a reason. It is your spoiled attitude that is the problem here. The rules clearly state that brakes are not allowed. If you want to shoot F class, follow the rules, don't whine until you get your way.

I'm not "whining until I get my way". I shoot F-T/R. I'm advocating for growing the sport.

Many ranges already do allow a tac division complete with those evil debilitating brakes, it just isn't recognized by the NRA.

F-class would not even exist if it weren't for shooters as you so eloquently put it, "whining until they got their way" with a new vision from an existing sport that didn't allow rests or optics.

Sports evolve or they die.

 

[Warren Dean]

77 posts later and it would seem to me that F Class shooters don't want another F-class division that allows muzzle breaks because they serve no purpose in the discipline and cause other unwanted issues.
PRS shooters want to compete in everything with a single rifle, and there should be no rules against their participation because it might create some kind of hardship on their time or finances.
Match directors want more participation but can't seem to attract people to their discipline so they want to bastardize the whole thing rather than allow limited participation to improve it.
Few people have any respect for any rules and expect everyone to adapt to their particular requirements to keep them happy. Sounds to me like we need to start giving out participation trophy's for people showing up. Probably need to start giving extra points to men who identify as women too.
Pick a sport. Play by the rules, go home, or create a new sport.
F Class started this same way. Another sport was needed to meet shooters needs, so one was created
PRS started just a dozen years ago and has seen tremendous success.
IHMSA where I got my competitive shooting introduction is all but dead.
There have been many people who started in F-Class with a hunting riffle or an AR 15 and went on to embrace the sport in order to compete. Stop with the "we need a new F-Class" and welcome those who come with what they have and encourage them to learn the sport and to adapt to it.
F-Class will either thrive, die, or stagnate, Those involved today will shape its future, but if it it's future is unrecognizable from the past is it the same?
Guns are tools. For those that say they should only have one, you are no mechanic. A wrench is not a screwdriver, and neither are a hammer. Get the appropriate tool for the job.

Rset, That was a very spot-on post and echos my own feelings. I only wish I were as eloquent as you.

 

[Warren Dean]

I'm not "whining until I get my way". I shoot F-T/R. I'm advocating for growing the sport.

Many ranges already do allow a tac division complete with those evil debilitating brakes, it just isn't recognized by the NRA.

F-class would not even exist if it weren't for shooters as you so eloquently put it, "whining until they got their way" with a new vision from an existing sport that didn't allow rests or optics.

Sports evolve or they die.

Dude,

You can bitch and moan and whine all you want. Muzzle brakes aren't going to be allowed in proper F Class competition. And rightfully so. The blast is obnoxious and building a "shield box", as you described, is asinine for F Class. I have been watching this thread and your ever-increasing zeal and pomposity, combined with the attempted mic drop statements, like "sports evolve or they die", are really annoying.

Rset put it perfectly. I am sure that he speaks for most of the F Class fraternity, most of whom stay out of threads like these. I relish the opportunity to defend F Class from anyone trying to bastardize it.

As has been stated several times in this thread, play by the rules or go do something else.

Peace, out

 

[sfinn1]

I don't think many are looking at this from a match directors stand point. We originally started our matches with Conventional (sling) and F Class. Then AR Tactical came along. We added that and was not really a problem. We run two targets, F Class and Sling. I lay out squadding the night before so I know the number of F and Sling targets to be set up. Now, we have shooters signed up and not showing up and once in a while a walk on. So let's re squad. Now let's add a new class with muzzle brakes. Pull out the blast barriers which I have used, and do the squadding.
Match directors are now pulling their hair out while everyone is standing around waiting for the match to start. Oh, we may have to set up more electronic targets because we now have another two man firing point instead of three. And we sure aren't going to squad a slinger with a muzzle brake to even things out.
Now that I've vented my long winded opinion, I sure as heck am not going to accommodate just anything just because someone thinks they are entitled to use their rifle that does not conform to "the intent" of an NRA match.