F-Class Open forend width - clarification needed

[Taildrag15X]

Yep...Ragged nailed it.....measure ANY bolt action rifle From the widest point on the off side to the tip of the bolt. It is over 3" unless it is a rimfire. Then it will be touch and go.

Anyone who would disqualify a gun because the BBL block is over 3" is looking at DQ himself....if he shoots a bolt gun.

Just sayin...

WRONG, the barrel block is not the question at hand..........

The question was about "forearm", and it is not in any means part of the bolt knob.

I was there the day that Jury Team of 3, plus the Jury Chair came up with this "From the Trigger Guard ( you can't even quote the reference part correct) forward towards the muzzle". The firearm in this case used a trigger guard that is as long as the Receiver as in likeness to a Rem. BDL, the forward most part of this Trigger Guard reached almost to the Barrel/Lug & Reciever junction. To simplify, the reference was made that the stock forward of any reciever on a 2-piece stock set or shotgun is called the "Forearm". For reference any Winchester 66,' 73,' 86', 92', 94'...etc.....you get the picture.

Maybe they should of used the term "from the Reciever forward", but they didn't.

These were not "hate filled, want to get even with, don't like" people, or they would not be on the Jury or be Chair of that post. They are very knowledgable men that have been in the Game long enough to know what they are doing.

And a Rifle stock 3.3" wide from the butt stock to the tip of the Forearm is not with in the rules.

76 mm converts to 2.99212", so the Rulebook states "Approximately 3 inches".

Just quit trying to build a Rifle dead on to the specs that are blurred..............

I don't want Rules with stock drawings as I mentioned earlier.

 

[4xforfun]

Mike,

The BBL BLOCK is the whole reason for this post....Raggad was asking for a clarificatin to the 3" rule......His stock is 3" where it contacts the bag, but his BBL block is 3.3".

At least that is what I got from his post.

So the question remains...is a gun with a 3" forend, but a 3.3 inch BBL block leagle for F class??

 

[memilanuk]

That probably depends on what or where you define as the 'fore end'.

I'd say for functional purposes, where the stock meets the front rest, as to my mind it doesn't really matter if the dang thing is 6" wide elsewhere, as long as it's 3" where it is supported by the rest, so long as it makes weight, etc. The only problem is someone will probably try to find an unforeseen way to 'game' that sort of definition, though I can't imagine how...

Elsewhere in the thread there is apparently some precedent for defining it as 'forward of the trigger guard', which seems a bit far back to me.

Others might logically call it 'forward of the front edge of the receiver' - which would still cause the OP grief with his barrel block section, since it would be, by definition as a 'barrel block', forward of that point. That, and you know some 'genius' would try to field a stock with a 6" wide section directly *under* the receiver and situate his rest there. I don't think it would work very well, but who knows...

Some people like pushing the limits just because... I saw a guy show up at a match (FCNC, no less) with a stock with a 3" wide *butt stock*. I'm not sure it helped him any, but I don't think even the 'spirit of the rules' clause could prevent that - as its not even remotely mentioned.

 

[Taildrag15X]

Yes Monte don't think that stock was in the "spirit of the rules", but think that the statement
"This discipline is a modification of high power prone shooting, not a form of bench rest and should not be construed as such." might of raised an eye brow or two.

You should of seen the looks I got with the first set of Pod Paws on a Harris bi pod.......or the Bulz Eye (Gene Davis) booster.

I see in the Guns of the Week there's an F-Open Switch barrel setup with barrel blocks not even close to 3.3" wide:

http://www.accurateshooter.com/guns-of-week/gunweek075/

 

[memilanuk]

Mmmm... being as thats a Canadian rifle & shooter (and a few years back I believe), I'm not sure he's bound by current US NRA rules

To be honest, I've never paid that much attention to the Canadian F/Open rules... not sure if that was legal then; I *believe* current Canadian rules bear a strong resemblance to ICFRA rules which limit fore-end width to 76mm.

Then again, I think there is a certain amount of 'stuff' that goes on @ club level matches, even NRA Approved ones. People get kind of weird when I bring out the scale and tape measure at ours; never had anyone not pass yet though.

 

[RAGGED]

First off, RELAX already, nobody is trying to game the system , it's a friendly conversation on a specific rule that is less than clear. If you and the jury you were on were able to come up with one I don't think it’s too much to ask the same of the NRA, at any rate I've already changed the design, doesn’t look as good but it will conform to YOUR rules as well as the NRA's.

The fact is the rule you came up with on the jury is NOT what is specifically stated in the rule book and does NOT conform with similar rules found in other sanctioning bodies (they all seem to define contact which is MUCH simpler to design for and enforce.

You have repeatedly said you don’t want more rules, well with all due respect that is in fact your personal opinion and you do in fact speek for yourself. I personally would not mind a few more sentences here and there if it helped eliminate blurry areas. There is nothing wrong with innovation and nothing wrong with seeking the best possible performance thru intelligent design.

That probably depends on what or where you define as the 'fore end'.

I'd say for functional purposes, where the stock meets the front rest, as to my mind it doesn't really matter if the dang thing is 6" wide elsewhere, as long as it's 3" where it is supported by the rest, so long as it makes weight, etc. The only problem is someone will probably try to find an unforeseen way to 'game' that sort of definition, though I can't imagine how...

That’s EXACTLY how I see it, the clause referring to spirit leaves a window to stop any "pushers" from finding a loophole. I guess in my case you would have to see it to understand the issue, there is no gaming involved and there is a very clear reason for the form, but at any rate, as I stated above, it has been changed just in case I got someone that wanted to make a stink and make up rules/definitions on the fly.

Elsewhere in the thread there is apparently some precedent for defining it as 'forward of the trigger guard', which seems a bit far back to me.

Others might logically call it 'forward of the front edge of the receiver' - which would still cause the OP grief with his barrel block section, since it would be, by definition as a 'barrel block', forward of that point. That, and you know some 'genius' would try to field a stock with a 6" wide section directly *under* the receiver and situate his rest there. I don't think it would work very well, but who knows...

Some people like pushing the limits just because... I saw a guy show up at a match (FCNC, no less) with a stock with a 3" wide *butt stock*. I'm not sure it helped him any, but I don't think even the 'spirit of the rules' clause could prevent that - as it’s not even remotely mentioned.

I think the points above mirrors the same points I stated in the first post, the term forearm is not defined and is very much open to interpretation, it would seem smarter to simply call out the contact as other rules do, no need to define anything more at that point.


If I was interested is exploiting the rules and “gaming” the system I would take it a step forward and point out they don’t define how the forearm is to be measured. A set up as drawn below would pass the 76mm width rule if measured with a caliper, its no wider than 76mm at any given point, but its effective width in the contact area would be almost 5 inches, so that design would be completely legal by the NRA rules, that is until it was deemed not in good spirit! ;D