F-T/R Bullet Weight Cap (proposed), discussion.
- Thread starter scaxeman
- Start date
Keith Glasscock
Gold $$ Contributor
Let's do the math - If my 155 load gets a wind deflection of 7.7 inches per mph (3125 fps) and the 230 gets 5.8 inches per mph (2595 fps), and we have a steady 5 mph full-value wind, there is no advantage, but if the wind is swinging about wildly, and I make a .9 mph wind mis-call (I wish I was that good) I get a deflection of 5.22" (just outside the 10 ring - the point is a toss-up), but the 155 with the same error gets 6.93" of unanticipated drift (a solid 9).
If we consider the likelyhood of such an event happening, consider how wild the conditions have to be in order to make exactly a .9 mph wind error. When we look at the benefit of a lower-drift bullet, we have to realize that both shooters must make the exact same error, and that error has to fall into one of the "gained point windows"
In my example, the 10 ring window is between 0.65 mph and 0.86 mph.
The 9 ring window is 1.3 mph to 1.72mph
The 8 ring window is 1.94 mph to 2.58 mph
If we consider the amount of the error spectrum that is likely going to hapen (no worse than 8's shot) AND that most shooters are going to see errors of 1.5 mph or greater, then we have to surmise that of all possible errors, there is only about a 27.3% chance that the error will randomly be in a "point gain window"
All of this is assuming that both shooters make exactly the same errors, have absolutely wonderful rifle handling, and have equally good load quality in the vertical.
When I shoot 200's against top shooters, I can see that I pick up a point here or there over several days, but in the end analysis, I bet some of my limitations have to do with recoil. For that matter, I'm only launching a 200 at 2595fps. If I shot 230's at that same velocity, the recoil would be 20% greater (32% greater than the 155's).
What's my point? I've forgotten already, but the concept of "point gain window" is something I thought I'd share.
If we consider the likelyhood of such an event happening, consider how wild the conditions have to be in order to make exactly a .9 mph wind error. When we look at the benefit of a lower-drift bullet, we have to realize that both shooters must make the exact same error, and that error has to fall into one of the "gained point windows"
In my example, the 10 ring window is between 0.65 mph and 0.86 mph.
The 9 ring window is 1.3 mph to 1.72mph
The 8 ring window is 1.94 mph to 2.58 mph
If we consider the amount of the error spectrum that is likely going to hapen (no worse than 8's shot) AND that most shooters are going to see errors of 1.5 mph or greater, then we have to surmise that of all possible errors, there is only about a 27.3% chance that the error will randomly be in a "point gain window"
All of this is assuming that both shooters make exactly the same errors, have absolutely wonderful rifle handling, and have equally good load quality in the vertical.
When I shoot 200's against top shooters, I can see that I pick up a point here or there over several days, but in the end analysis, I bet some of my limitations have to do with recoil. For that matter, I'm only launching a 200 at 2595fps. If I shot 230's at that same velocity, the recoil would be 20% greater (32% greater than the 155's).
What's my point? I've forgotten already, but the concept of "point gain window" is something I thought I'd share.
[br]scaxeman said:I've got mine pushed out till they just have ~.170" bearing surface in the neck, to provide maximum case capacity. Thus the 3.27" OAL. Hopefully I'll be able to get them out this weekend and try them under match conditions... We'll see!
Darrell
At 3.175 in Palma brass, my load of N550 that gives 2503 is uncompressed. QL says it is 99.2%. The H4350 load, down 50 fps, is ~106%. Standard Lapua brass gives ~40 fps more velocity and would allow a little more flexibility. [br]
Good luck, report on your results. Are you shooting with a tight or relatively loose grip? I have my shoulder in full contact with the butt and a light grip. The Sinclair bipod feet are felt covered and on a very slippery board. Correct body position is pretty important to minimize lateral muzzle displacement.
[br]dooley said:
At least in the U.S. I don't know about U.K.
Nodak7mm
Team Lefse
XTR said:
XTR, What's that all about ? ??? It appears you may have misunderstood the "point" of emphasis in my post I was attempting to make. On one hand, your telling me I am talking out of my butt & and in your next breath it appears we agree.
FWIW: I dont care what bullet or cartridge a guy runs. The shooter who puts in his time, practices, travels to different venues getting experience will come out on top. There is no magic bullet or cartridge for that matter. Its the nut behind the trigger ...
Respectfully,
Rod Vigstol
sleepygator said:
When I'm running my usual 155.5's, Ive got a relaxed position on the rifle, light to moderate shoulder pressure, light to NO bipod load, light grip. With the 230's you really have to drive them. My 'uber-heavy' position isn't fully developed yet, but I've been having success flipping the shooting mat back around (so the rubber mat part is under the bipod feet), that allows me to load the bipod somewhat. My grip is rather firmer, and of course, shoulder pressure is much more an issue. Any little misstep in position and technique results in flyers.
Darrell
Personally would hope that the TR-F stays with no weight restrictions. #1 US NRA "LR" rules do not prohibit bullet weight in the Palma category so the idea that is floating around that guys will have to get new barrels is a no issue, my current Palma barrel is a 11T, and I shoot 155's as well in that . #2 If you see what is available in other countries as NZ or Australia that have the older 13T barrels you would quickly realize that they are not competitive at any bullet weight, SPORTCO's etc. # TR-F is highly competitive and any win will be with top equipment even if its a factory gun. This includes the large numbers of Remington, Savage ,, varmint rifles that already have 12 or 10T barrels and throats that all too often are already too long to shoot 155's. Which means in effect they will have to have barrels set back or replaced to shoot , "SOME" of the current 155's . #4 This now means that scrutinizing will have to be stepped up , further intrusion to shooters . #5 Higher BC's is not the end all , what is not being talked about is the higher arc the projectile has to travel which now adds to the vertical string in heavy winds, in effect it doesn't solve all of the problems.
The best rules are KISS , adding a bullet weight sends the wrong message.
The best rules are KISS , adding a bullet weight sends the wrong message.
[br]mrmax said:
While I agree with your other points, the maximum ordinate of 230 Hybrids is actually pretty good. I ran ballistics for both the 155.5 FULLBORE Berger at 3000 fps and the 230 Hybrid at 2500 fps. These are velocities at which I shot both successfully (more or less) at 1000 yard matches. You can see that the maximum ordinate is only 7.5" higher for the 230 Hybrid. That whopping big B.C. really does a good job at range. Note the retained velocity at 1000. The 230, starting 500 fps slower, retains 162 fps more velocity than the FULLBORE. These numbers would be improved somewhat by the 155 Hybrid.
Turbulent Turtle
F-TR competitor
scaxeman said:
Darrell, I was with you until the above post. It's all a matter of perspective. You view it at the national or even international level, whereas most people and certainly all new shooters view it at the local or regional level.
(Let me get on my soapbox.)
In the Houston area, there is only one 1000yard range and I believe it's the only one within a driving radius that allows somebody who works and has a family to be able to show up regularly. In fact we get shooters from San Antonio, Austin and Dallas on a fairly consistent basis.
We have shooters at varying levels of development; we have world class shooters with the very best of equipment and skills to match, we have brand new shooters with an off-the-rack "tactical" rifle and we have everything in between. Classifications are important for the new shooters so they are not discouraged right off the bat. Everybody starts at some point and they learn, develop skills and grow in the sport, if they choose to do so. They talk to others, ask questions, draw their own conclusions and in many cases, upgrade their equipment over time and they get better.
I like to think that we foster the development of all the shooters by recognizing their achievements. At the end of each competition, we announce the winners and runners-up for each match and classification. Some people think it's a waste of time and we should just publish the results, but I think it's just another way of helping grow the competitors and the sport.
So, I would certainly not dismiss these classifications out of hand as you seem to do; at the local level they are extremely useful. The vast majority of shooters will never get to a national competition but they are still competitors and they keep the sport alive.
(off my soapbox.)
memilanuk
Gold $$ Contributor
Since we're wandering a tad here, but still generally in the same time zone as the original topic...
Generally... I do agree that for a lot of people, the current F-Class shooter classification system has more to do with 'where' you shoot than absolute skill level, and the lack of separation between scores shot as F/TR vs. F/Open is somewhat of a problem.
That said... its not by any means unique to F-Class. 90+% of the mid-range prone shooters I know are all 'High Masters'. Generally matches are broken into 'HM' and 'Combined Master' aka 'Everybody else', and often there is barely enough of 'Everybody else' to make a full 5 person class for awards. Extend that to LR and the percentages change somewhat, but there are still way more 'HM' shooters than any other class. Granted, most of the ones I'm familiar with *are* very good shooters - certainly better from a sling than I am (a lowly MA). But IMO, when the overwhelming majority of shooters are effectively 'maxed out' in the current classification system, it loses some of its effectiveness in stratifying the crowd. Yes, it does give new shooters a sort of yard-stick by which to gauge their progress, as well as an idea of who to listen to in the pits
Another point that is very similar for F/TR vs. F/Open... is the separation between Service Rifle and Match Rifle/Any Rifle/etc. From a purely technical aspect, the modern 'Service Rifle' as seen in NRA/CMP matches is frighteningly accurate - generally speaking, accurate enough given premium puppy chow, to clean NRA MR and LR targets. It's also *harder* to shoot that well, for a variety of reasons. But it is a challenge voluntarily accepted by those who choose to shoot that kind of smoke pole - and I generally *don't* hear Service Rifle shooters complaining that its 'not fair' that they get the same Mid or Long-Range Prone classification card as folks shooting Match Rifle or Palma Rifles. It's generally accepted that its *not* an apples-to-apples comparison, and its not necessarily true that a person with a given classification using a SR is going to beat the pants off all the MR shooters just by switching to a new gun - they are two different - closely related, but different, skill sets. Much like F/TR vs. F/Open...
One could take that last point as an argument *for* separating the classifications between the two groups... but in the real world, it comes down to this: you can break things down umpteen different ways, but outside of very large matches - i.e. larger Regional Championships or any of the various 'National' Championships - how often do you actually see enough attendance to break down not just by F/Open vs. F/TR, but by shooter class (HM, MA, EX, etc.)? In the PNW, the answer is 'not very'. Other areas like Sacramento or Butner might be a different story. But further splitting the categories into F/TR - HM, F/TR - MA, F/Open - HM, F/Open - MA, etc. kind of hits the point of diminishing returns. Like some of the ideas that get floated on a regular basis about various 'factory' or 'tactical' classes... they might be very good ideas in some areas, but might not be viable in others - or on a larger scale.
YMMV,
Monte
Generally... I do agree that for a lot of people, the current F-Class shooter classification system has more to do with 'where' you shoot than absolute skill level, and the lack of separation between scores shot as F/TR vs. F/Open is somewhat of a problem.
That said... its not by any means unique to F-Class. 90+% of the mid-range prone shooters I know are all 'High Masters'. Generally matches are broken into 'HM' and 'Combined Master' aka 'Everybody else', and often there is barely enough of 'Everybody else' to make a full 5 person class for awards. Extend that to LR and the percentages change somewhat, but there are still way more 'HM' shooters than any other class. Granted, most of the ones I'm familiar with *are* very good shooters - certainly better from a sling than I am (a lowly MA). But IMO, when the overwhelming majority of shooters are effectively 'maxed out' in the current classification system, it loses some of its effectiveness in stratifying the crowd. Yes, it does give new shooters a sort of yard-stick by which to gauge their progress, as well as an idea of who to listen to in the pits
Another point that is very similar for F/TR vs. F/Open... is the separation between Service Rifle and Match Rifle/Any Rifle/etc. From a purely technical aspect, the modern 'Service Rifle' as seen in NRA/CMP matches is frighteningly accurate - generally speaking, accurate enough given premium puppy chow, to clean NRA MR and LR targets. It's also *harder* to shoot that well, for a variety of reasons. But it is a challenge voluntarily accepted by those who choose to shoot that kind of smoke pole - and I generally *don't* hear Service Rifle shooters complaining that its 'not fair' that they get the same Mid or Long-Range Prone classification card as folks shooting Match Rifle or Palma Rifles. It's generally accepted that its *not* an apples-to-apples comparison, and its not necessarily true that a person with a given classification using a SR is going to beat the pants off all the MR shooters just by switching to a new gun - they are two different - closely related, but different, skill sets. Much like F/TR vs. F/Open...
One could take that last point as an argument *for* separating the classifications between the two groups... but in the real world, it comes down to this: you can break things down umpteen different ways, but outside of very large matches - i.e. larger Regional Championships or any of the various 'National' Championships - how often do you actually see enough attendance to break down not just by F/Open vs. F/TR, but by shooter class (HM, MA, EX, etc.)? In the PNW, the answer is 'not very'. Other areas like Sacramento or Butner might be a different story. But further splitting the categories into F/TR - HM, F/TR - MA, F/Open - HM, F/Open - MA, etc. kind of hits the point of diminishing returns. Like some of the ideas that get floated on a regular basis about various 'factory' or 'tactical' classes... they might be very good ideas in some areas, but might not be viable in others - or on a larger scale.
YMMV,
Monte
bayou shooter said:
Denys,
You misunderstand me, I don't dismiss the local/entry level shooter at all. Far from it, that has been one of the reasons I brought up this thread in the first place. Anyone that knows me will have no doubt at the amount of assistance and encouragement I have given over the years to guys getting into the sport.
What I said was that the classification system (unless we segregate F-Open from F-T/R scores in said classification system) will never be the guide to relative skill level that it perhaps is in Palma, etc.
Heck, I think I'm still sporting a long-range 'Expert' card!
Best,
Darrell
Turbulent Turtle
F-TR competitor
So, what you are saying is that there should be a classification for F-T/R and another for F-Open as opposed to one just for F-Class.
I always thought it should be that way. Perhaps that is something that should be explained to the NRA.
I always thought it should be that way. Perhaps that is something that should be explained to the NRA.
XTR
F-TR obssessed shooting junkie
bayou shooter, the classifications for F class below High Master are all set one class or point threshold higher than the sling shooter classifications. To shoot Expert in F class you need to maintain a 188 or better for every 20 rounds you shoot for score, and Master takes a 193. Shooting exclusively F-TR even maintaining a 188 hard, and how many people week in and week out can shoot 193s? With any wind at all a 308 just gets pushed around too much.
The classifications make sense for the open guys, it's not easy, but Master/HM are probably achievable, but shooting exclusively F-TR I just don't see it happening. One MPH lifts and let-offs are just too hard to see, and they cost a point every time you miss one.
The exception, and one "boost" to your long range classification is if you shoot with the Palma guys and shoot 800/900/1000 matches. Shooting the 1000 yard target from 800 is as big as you'll ever see the 10-ring.
The classifications make sense for the open guys, it's not easy, but Master/HM are probably achievable, but shooting exclusively F-TR I just don't see it happening. One MPH lifts and let-offs are just too hard to see, and they cost a point every time you miss one.
The exception, and one "boost" to your long range classification is if you shoot with the Palma guys and shoot 800/900/1000 matches. Shooting the 1000 yard target from 800 is as big as you'll ever see the 10-ring.
Turbulent Turtle
F-TR competitor
Darrell, agreed.
XTR, I am all too painfully familiar with the numbers and the vagaries of F-T/R. You need a 579 for Master, and I feel very good just getting into the 570s. I've done that twice in the last three matches, but it was in the low 570s. We always shoot 1000 yards.
XTR, I am all too painfully familiar with the numbers and the vagaries of F-T/R. You need a 579 for Master, and I feel very good just getting into the 570s. I've done that twice in the last three matches, but it was in the low 570s. We always shoot 1000 yards.
As a new competition shooter, with only two mid-range matches under my belt, I can honestly say that the lack of complicated and burdensome restrictions was one of the main points that attracted me to F-TR in the first place. How much more simple can you get? .308 or .223 and a bipod! Just don't go over weight, which I am in no danger of with a Savage Precision Carbine in .308 (even with a 1 Kilo Millet on top) or my Model12 .223. I don't even see why preemptive voting on bullet weight restrictions is being contemplated. That is, unless Savage doesn't wanna produce out-of-the-box rifles with overly long throats.
If folks are being driven off because they feel they cant compete with the "arms race", then they're not being realistic and would probably not be very fun to shoot with in any case ( the dang whiners). Both of my rigs shoot better than I do as it stands. I'll get there when I get there, and for now, I'll try to be competitive at Sharpshooter and work my way up, in both skill and equipment. A friendly greeting and encouragement at the range, and off, goes a whole lot further than anything to draw new shooters. Offering a chance for non-conforming calibers to shoot along side F-TR (though not for placement) would help, too. And if their possibly faster and/or flatter shooting cartridge made their scores look better by comparison, all the better. There's a lot of guys out there with 22-250, .243, etc., Coyote and Varmint rigs that are experienced shooting from bipods and would most likely invest in F-TR class rifles giving the chance to see how much fun it can be. Lumping them in with F-class and the fancy-smancy $ump-teen-hundred rest would seem to be more intimidating than learning some guy is shooting 230's in his .308!
If folks are being driven off because they feel they cant compete with the "arms race", then they're not being realistic and would probably not be very fun to shoot with in any case ( the dang whiners). Both of my rigs shoot better than I do as it stands. I'll get there when I get there, and for now, I'll try to be competitive at Sharpshooter and work my way up, in both skill and equipment. A friendly greeting and encouragement at the range, and off, goes a whole lot further than anything to draw new shooters. Offering a chance for non-conforming calibers to shoot along side F-TR (though not for placement) would help, too. And if their possibly faster and/or flatter shooting cartridge made their scores look better by comparison, all the better. There's a lot of guys out there with 22-250, .243, etc., Coyote and Varmint rigs that are experienced shooting from bipods and would most likely invest in F-TR class rifles giving the chance to see how much fun it can be. Lumping them in with F-class and the fancy-smancy $ump-teen-hundred rest would seem to be more intimidating than learning some guy is shooting 230's in his .308!
There goes the .308 shooters trying for edge over the 223 with 90gr,
to do it right in F/TR max bullet in .308 should be 185gr and the 223 90gr both have almost identical BC.s
F class will grow new shooters with factory 223 savages with 1/7 twist can be very competitive as well the .308 win shooting factory guns with 185gr bullets
The sport will grow,
guys building 34 " barrels shooting 200gr 230gr , 80x power scopes,etc at 2750 + will only ruin f class.
And another thing scopes should be limited to max of 50x
If you bring your wife, son or daughter or grandchild to try F class shooting letting them shoot the big .308 with 200 + bullets. will not do anything for them, just to much recoil. let them shoot a 223 and they will be back to shoot another day. and Fclass will grow.
to do it right in F/TR max bullet in .308 should be 185gr and the 223 90gr both have almost identical BC.s
F class will grow new shooters with factory 223 savages with 1/7 twist can be very competitive as well the .308 win shooting factory guns with 185gr bullets
The sport will grow,
guys building 34 " barrels shooting 200gr 230gr , 80x power scopes,etc at 2750 + will only ruin f class.
And another thing scopes should be limited to max of 50x
If you bring your wife, son or daughter or grandchild to try F class shooting letting them shoot the big .308 with 200 + bullets. will not do anything for them, just to much recoil. let them shoot a 223 and they will be back to shoot another day. and Fclass will grow.
Those who cannot compete always want to make rules so that everyone is forced to share their misery. Kind of like socialism. [br]
Sadly, neither ever works as intended.
[br]Sadly, neither ever works as intended.
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.