E-Targets for F-Class

[davidjoe]

I



The NRA has ruled see rule 10.17 and 10.17.1 (g) that is pretty clear they chose words "If Practical" and "May" that is not must, this allows each club to maximize the whole system and pick the time delay of 0 or more. I don't see the issue, you can only shoot fast if the wind allows and everyone on the line has the same time as the other guy, or we can go back to pullers and we all know that is so unfair, biased, cheating, but lets hold on the one more antiquated process, because, I don't know why, how about we all shoot Sierra 175's

Don Diffey

Late to reply and possibly repeating someone, above, didn’t read them all.

Don moves matches along at Bayou. That was a big E-target selling point. When you don’t go down to the pits anymore, there is a lot of idle time on the firing line with little to even watch, but that’s offset by the fact that no delay with infiltration could let twice as many shooters or more participate in the same overall time, and the sport is growing, while land for ranges is not.

I used to be able to see pasters and concentrations develop on targets through nice scopes. Once or twice a day my shots would be the only ones on. It was a very satisfying return on 3k and the reason for 48 ounces. These are no longer necessary (the whole x area can soon become optically mushy) and they are being replaced by light scopes with longer barrels. I’ll box the spotting scope for when birds become interesting.

I reloaded by feel and eyes were always forward watching wind and target. Now even if I could accurately machine gun shots I still have to alternate between the I-pad and the target.

So a delay and no plotting would walk back a lot of the benefits of E-targets while giving us the IPad distraction and a mushy target. To the extent I could see pasters before, it’s actually a handicap, unless I want to add a paper sheet and pen as third focal point.

Remember the teen driver or valet mode on sports cars, ... since we have Etargets let’s turn that off at least for all club matches and fully use them.

 

[Ned Ludd]

Just as I had begun to accept the inevitability of E-targets, you had to go and mention the idiocy of infiltration shooting so as to dramatically increase the number of shooters that can be jammed through a match in a single day, simply because of E-targets.

No, thank you.

 

[MattPeetz]

Infiltration is a poor way to run it.

 

[XTR]

Just as I had begun to accept the inevitability of E-targets, you had to go and mention the idiocy of infiltration shooting so as to dramatically increase the number of shooters that can be jammed through a match in a single day, simply because of E-targets.

No, thank you.

Infiltration shooting is the HP version of mag dumps.

 

[sdean]

Y’all sure worry about a lot of stuff!!

 

[David101]

I don't think I understand this statement. What would "the equivalent" of 1500 targets be?

Also, my club in MN has had e-targets for about 15 years now. Not the equivalent of 15 years, actually installed in 2004 or 2005.

I dont understand why this comment about metrics is so hard to understand. Taky the number of people in the US Vs Aus, the number of rifle ranges in each country, the number of shooters in each country. From some of these comparisons a good estimate of the market size in each country should be able to be derived and the market penetration then also compared and or extrapolated.

 

[Erud]

I dont understand why this comment about metrics is so hard to understand. Taky the number of people in the US Vs Aus, the number of rifle ranges in each country, the number of shooters in each country. From some of these comparisons a good estimate of the market size in each country should be able to be derived and the market penetration then also compared and or extrapolated.

Well, it’s hard to understand because it’s stupid and it makes no sense. I guess the concept you and Rusty Rick are pushing is sort like “dog years” then, huh? If the average human life expectancy is 70 years, and the average dog life expectancy is 10 years, then 10 human years = 70 dog years. Similarly, if the population of Australia is 25 million, and the population of the USA is 320 million, then the 50 or so actual Hexta targets in the USA = 1500 Aussie targets? I don’t know the total number of shooters, or the total number of rifle ranges in either country, maybe you could fill us in on those stats? I’d love to see how the “equivalent of 1500 targets” figure was arrived at.

 

[GSS]

I'd be happy with a simple, straight up, honest answer from Rick,
on how many Hex Targets were sold in the United States in the last 2 years and where are they installed at.

 

[Medic505]

I'd be happy with a simple, straight up, honest answer from Rick,
on how many Hex Targets were sold in the United States in the last 2 years and where are they installed at.

And, don't forget the most highly guarded secret...….How much do they cost?

 

[Medic505]

Well, it’s hard to understand because it’s stupid and it makes no sense. I guess the concept you and Rusty Rick are pushing is sort like “dog years” then, huh? If the average human life expectancy is 70 years, and the average dog life expectancy is 10 years, then 10 human years = 70 dog years. Similarly, if the population of Australia is 25 million, and the population of the USA is 320 million, then the 50 or so actual Hexta targets in the USA = 1500 Aussie targets? I don’t know the total number of shooters, or the total number of rifle ranges in either country, maybe you could fill us in on those stats? I’d love to see how the “equivalent of 1500 targets” figure was arrived at.

Much like a drunk driver telling a cop, in dog beers I've had one. The numbers just don't add up.

 

[corning]

And, don't forget the most highly guarded secret...….How much do they cost?

I think you have to join a secret society, complete with handshake and all the other falderal, for that information.

The real question is how come we haven't heard from anyone that has actually purchased, or inquired about the HEXTA system with regards to what they have paid, or what they were quoted? Non-disclosure?

John Corning

 

[David101]

Well, it’s hard to understand because it’s stupid and it makes no sense. I guess the concept you and Rusty Rick are pushing is sort like “dog years” then, huh? If the average human life expectancy is 70 years, and the average dog life expectancy is 10 years, then 10 human years = 70 dog years. Similarly, if the population of Australia is 25 million, and the population of the USA is 320 million, then the 50 or so actual Hexta targets in the USA = 1500 Aussie targets? I don’t know the total number of shooters, or the total number of rifle ranges in either country, maybe you could fill us in on those stats? I’d love to see how the “equivalent of 1500 targets” figure was arrived at.

So you think it is stupid to think that any manufacture could expect to sell the same number of units in both countries.

I and every Australian would have to consume 13 times more units each to consume the same total amount.

That sounds stupid

 

[Ned Ludd]

So you think it is stupid to think that any manufacture could expect to sell the same number of units in both countries.

I and every Australian would have to consume 13 times more units each to consume the same total amount.

That sounds stupid

No worries. Most of the Australians I have known could easily consume thirteen times more beer than I could handle on my best day .

I think the point being made above is simply that there is not a meaningful comparison of the "metrics of Australia to the USA" in terms of the relative number of E-targets in use of any brand. They are two completely different markets.

If Rick's comment was meant to suggest that the use of E-targets in Australia is more widely accepted on a relative basis (i.e. a higher percentage of the total number of shooters in Australia shoot on E-targets), that may well be an accurate statement. Based on numerous comments in these E-target threads, I would guess that there is a higher percentage of US shooters that have never fired on an E-target as compared to some other countries.

Whether lesser familiarity is the underlying cause of any perceived resistance to E-targets in the US, or whether E-targets have simply not become as popular here as in other places because of the resistance to their use could certainly be debated, although I'm not sure of the value of such a debate. Nonetheless, as Erud pointed out, some ranges in the US have been using E-targets for ~15 years, including at some pretty large venues, and at major matches. So it's also unreasonable to draw the conclusion that there aren't plenty of shooters here that are highly familiar with the features and use of E-targets.

 

[sdean]

No worries. Most of the Australians I have known could easily consume thirteen times more beer than I could handle on my best day .

I think the point being made above is simply that there is not a meaningful comparison of the "metrics of Australia to the USA" in terms of the relative number of E-targets in use of any brand. They are two completely different markets.

Plus the fact that their government subsidizes the cost of some targets definitely scews any comparisons. Probably one reason they cost so much.

 

[Erud]

So you think it is stupid to think that any manufacture could expect to sell the same number of units in both countries.

I and every Australian would have to consume 13 times more units each to consume the same total amount.

That sounds stupid

Yeah, it's crazy stupid. Consider the fact that we have 13 times the population here (and I'd guess a lot more competitive shooters and clubs), and Rick has only managed to sell 3 systems total. He's either a terrible salesman, or free markets don't work like you think they do. Maybe both. I'd say any manufacturer "expecting" to sell anything based on what they sold somewhere else has a high potential to be sadly disappointed.

 

[corning]

I dont understand why this comment about metrics is so hard to understand. Taky the number of people in the US Vs Aus, the number of rifle ranges in each country, the number of shooters in each country. From some of these comparisons a good estimate of the market size in each country should be able to be derived and the market penetration then also compared and or extrapolated.

The original quote driving this sub-discussion is "...if you were to compare the metrics of Australia to the USA, there would be the equivalent of 1500 HEXTA targets here." That is a very convoluted and misleading statement. If someone really wanted to draw a relationship between USA and Australia, they should use a "per capita" metric. IE: how many targets per shooter, or how many targets per range. It cannot be the "equivalent" in order to distort the actual usage, or potential market penetration.

John Corning

 

[GSS]

I'm still hoping Rick will simply come clean and answer the question with a number of units sold and name the ranges they were sold to and the current pricing.

Not many listed in the USA on their website and none new in the USA that I see
https://www.hexsystems.com.au/latest-events/hexta-debuts-in-north-america/


They truly are an awesome system for those clubs that can swing the cost.

His pattern here and one other forum I have been in discussions with him on has been to disappear for a few days to a week or so then come back with amnesia and never respond to the questions. Then post a pot shot or two or something intended to raise doubt in his competitors products starting this whole cycle over again. Sometimes I don't think he really comes here to sell his product but one never knows. I keep hoping his interactions and sales tactics will improve.

I was hoping his excellent product would be more cost effective now that they are made in the USA but he continues to refuse to answer that question publicly and they still won't list the cost on the website.

His product, he's the salesman so his choice how he wants to interact with potential customers.... I guess...

My shopping for my club is now complete with the purchase of 10 Shotmarkers and we are very happy as they do all we need them to do and more.

When I got pricing from Rick back when I was shopping ( with 2 other clubs potentially combining for a 30 - 40 target order ) and comparing all our options he asked me not to publicly divulge the cost as it was "special pricing".
I plan to keep my word to him on that.

Who knows what the future will bring.
IMO having at least a few vendors for us consumers to choose from helps keep cost down and drive continuous improvement of the product.

George Smith
www.nfga.org

 

[rardoin]

Yeah, it's crazy stupid. Consider the fact that we have 13 times the population here (and I'd guess a lot more competitive shooters and clubs), and Rick has only managed to sell 3 systems total. He's either a terrible salesman, or free markets don't work like you think they do. Maybe both. I'd say any manufacturer "expecting" to sell anything based on what they sold somewhere else has a high potential to be sadly disappointed.

I wouldn't slander Rick. The Hexta system is a very good system but it is expensive and beyond what most clubs can budget. It does require maintenance that is more costly than open mic systems. I have a ballpark idea of what it cost one range to install 10 targets with monitors/charging system/network/wifi etc.. Having a dedicated bespoke monitor is a great plus as well as having sensors less likely to be affected by environmental conditions is also a great plus....but there is a price to be paid and that is Hexta's greatest impediment in the U.S. market. Adam McDonald realized that a less costly but adequate system was missing from the market and he is filling the niche. It has nothing to do with Rick himself. Please refrain from bashing.

 

[spclark]

Adam McDonald realized that a less costly but adequate system was missing from the market and he is filling the niche.

In all truth Adam wasn’t the first.

He did manage to get word of his Shot Marker system out literally days before Silver Mountain Targets announced their SOLO product’s availability, and at a slight discount to what SMT sells theirs for.

SMT’s been around for awhile, developing the technology and making open-mic systems available to both interested clubs as well as individuals users.

 

[rardoin]

In all truth Adam wasn’t the first.

He did manage to get word of his Shot Marker system out literally days before Silver Mountain Targets announced their SOLO product’s availability, and at a slight discount to what SMT sells theirs for.

SMT’s been around for awhile, developing the technology and making open-mic systems available to both interested clubs as well as individuals users.

True...but why did SMT drop the price of the SOLO? They knew what was coming down the pike soon. Otherwise why not keep it at $3K and still be a lot less than competitiors?