Future of AR-Tactical Poll

[Andy Legg]

I apologize in advance to OP for being not exactly on topic(Future of AR-Tactical Poll).

About 2 years ago my teenage son(Dylan) started showing interest in shooting more than just .22's. He wanted to shoot my 24" Wilson Barreled AR and my Savage 6.5CM. At local public ranges he was quickly able to get out to 300 yards and was pretty much able to hold a 1 moa group most of the time(Quite a few flyers....but he was learning the basics).

My Dad is member of Bayou Rifles and suggested we take a look at his clubs High Power Match Program. Dylan & I shot a few of the 1000 yard tournaments with my Savage(We're newbies...My high score=176 & Dylan's=182) before hearing about the Tactial AR Mid-Range Class.

We looked through my stuff/AR parts & threw together a 16" Wilson Bull Barreled 5.56 AR Upper and put it on an A2 Lower. We've shimmed the Barrel extension(Thermal Fitted to Receiver), replaced the trigger with a 4-1/2# Rock River and Filled the A2 Stock compartment with BB's(for weight). This is a $600 Rifle. We added a $40 UTG Folding Bipod and on Black Friday we purchased an 10x42 SWFA & Mount(<$300). I already had most of what we needed.....but even if you had to purchase it all....it would be well south of $1000 Total Investment. This a home built AR that will shoot about 1 MOA(60 shot strings....not 3 shot groups).

My Dad(Dylan's Grandfather....aka Paw-Paw) has been loading pulled projectiles(77 SMK's) purchased from the likes of American Reloading(on sale @ $89.99/1000) for us to shoot. They are sorted by length/weight and we use any culls for plinking & Barrel fouling. We're using LC Brass(Range Pick-Up). It costs about 0.24-0.26/round. Short story....it's cheap to shoot & my dad likes loading for us. My mom likes it too.....keeps Dad in the garage some and out of the house Paw-Paw has been honing his reloading technique's. At the TSRA Mid-Range Championship Paw-Paw's load showed a 6.9 fps SD for a 20 shot sting on the Shot Marker.


Yes, We're newbies....and have made many newbie mistakes.

Yes, we can afford to shoot this discipline without breaking the bank.

Yes, Dylan has learned a tremendous amount about Shooting Position, Reading Wind(the 16" Barrel at 600 in the wind has been a challenge at times).

Yes, In a 18 months Dylan at 16 years old made High Master(But, just barely scoring 1182 of the 1182 required).

Yes, Dylan has discussed eventually moving to something more challenging(either to Service Rifle or to FT-R).

Yes, we have made new friends at Bayou Rifles(Manvel, Texas), Beaumont Gun Club(Beaumont, Texas) Panola Gun Club(Carthage, Texas) & Long Range Alley(Shreveport, Louisiana). I can't say enough about what the folks at these clubs and their MD's & Volunteers do to make these tournament happen.

Yes, A Father, Son & Grandfather have had a great time doing all this together.

 

[Herzo]

CIHPRS has the welcoming part down.

 

[Erud]

I apologize in advance to OP for being not exactly on topic(Future of AR-Tactical Poll).

About 2 years ago my teenage son(Dylan) started showing interest in shooting more than just .22's. He wanted to shoot my 24" Wilson Barreled AR and my Savage 6.5CM. At local public ranges he was quickly able to get out to 300 yards and was pretty much able to hold a 1 moa group most of the time(Quite a few flyers....but he was learning the basics).

My Dad is member of Bayou Rifles and suggested we take a look at his clubs High Power Match Program. Dylan & I shot a few of the 1000 yard tournaments with my Savage(We're newbies...My high score=176 & Dylan's=182) before hearing about the Tactial AR Mid-Range Class.

We looked through my stuff/AR parts & threw together a 16" Wilson Bull Barreled 5.56 AR Upper and put it on an A2 Lower. We've shimmed the Barrel extension(Thermal Fitted to Receiver), replaced the trigger with a 4-1/2# Rock River and Filled the A2 Stock compartment with BB's(for weight). This is a $600 Rifle. We added a $40 UTG Folding Bipod and on Black Friday we purchased an 10x42 SWFA & Mount(<$300). I already had most of what we needed.....but even if you had to purchase it all....it would be well south of $1000 Total Investment. This a home built AR that will shoot about 1 MOA(60 shot strings....not 3 shot groups).

My Dad(Dylan's Grandfather....aka Paw-Paw) has been loading pulled projectiles(77 SMK's) purchased from the likes of American Reloading(on sale @ $89.99/1000) for us to shoot. They are sorted by length/weight and we use any culls for plinking & Barrel fouling. We're using LC Brass(Range Pick-Up). It costs about 0.24-0.26/round. Short story....it's cheap to shoot & my dad likes loading for us. My mom likes it too.....keeps Dad in the garage some and out of the house Paw-Paw has been honing his reloading technique's. At the TSRA Mid-Range Championship Paw-Paw's load showed a 6.9 fps SD for a 20 shot sting on the Shot Marker.


Yes, We're newbies....and have made many newbie mistakes.

Yes, we can afford to shoot this discipline without breaking the bank.

Yes, Dylan has learned a tremendous amount about Shooting Position, Reading Wind(the 16" Barrel at 600 in the wind has been a challenge at times).

Yes, In a 18 months Dylan at 16 years old made High Master(But, just barely scoring 1182 of the 1182 required).

Yes, Dylan has discussed eventually moving to something more challenging(either to Service Rifle or to FT-R).

Yes, we have made new friends at Bayou Rifles(Manvel, Texas), Beaumont Gun Club(Beaumont, Texas) Panola Gun Club(Carthage, Texas) & Long Range Alley(Shreveport, Louisiana). I can't say enough about what the folks at these clubs and their MD's & Volunteers do to make these tournament happen.

Yes, A Father, Son & Grandfather have had a great time doing all this together.

I'd say that's exactly how this new class should work. Well done.

 

[marty dabney]

i'd like to see the class remain as my son has started shooting it and my daughter is right behind him. they could care less about sling/position shooting and i'm ok with that, at least they are showing interest in shooting. IMO, a few simple rules would help make it easier on the MD and still make it competitive.

1. 2 separate classes. .223/ .308 in one class and the rest in an "open" class

2. no ammo length restrictions on any ammo.

3. any safe trigger.

4. any scope.

5. remove the rear bags.

6. shoot it for a year, if we start seeing a bunch of 600-60x's fired, re visit the target and consider switching to the F-class target.

we already have classifications in place to divide the marksman from the high masters. if a new shooter shows up and quits because he got beat then that's on him. the rifle platform itself will be self regulating as there is only but so much you can do to a 223 AR-15 to make it better. you still have to call wind and break the shot in the middle

 

[Mr. Ten-X]

Some of you may be interested to hear that a couple of the F-TR guru's stated "we already have a class that AR's and .223's can shoot in...it's called F-TR" before this class was ever proposed to the NRA HP Committee. Pretty forward-thinking on their part. The idea was to get America's Rifle on the shooting range for a precision shooting game and in their own division. Done right and promoted well, it could be THE biggest shooting game that exists for rifles.

Where NRA really blew it was by making this class "all-inclusive" straight out of the gate. They bent over and grabbed their ankles for the 5% of AR platform owners instead of the group that makes up the vast bulk of AR owners...the .223/5.56 owners. I mean, if you are trying to get people on the range with a new class, why not put the bulk of shooters at a serious disadvantage right out of the gate?? Any of you that think a 6.5mm or 6mm doesn't have a clear advantage over a .223 have been smoking too much rope. Give me either one and I'll beat the .223 shooter every time and I do not care who is behind the trigger.

The other place where they blew it was by not requiring "mag length ammunition". If .223's are forced to shoot the 75-77 grain projectiles, I would be interested in watching a shooter fire all X's at 300, 500 and 600 yards on the standard NRA sling targets. The other point of mag length ammo is that the average guy can purchase factory match ammo with a 75/77 grain bullet and not be at a serious disadvantage to those handloading them. Get the drift...?? Allow the folks that handload the ability to use long-seated, high-BC projectiles and they will smoke the average shooters using the 75/77's. Again...the entire point of this exercise is to get the AR's out of the safe and on the range at minimal cost, keep things equal and MAKE THE GAME A WIND-READING MATCH....not an equipment race.

 

[Herzo]

Mr. Ten-x is close, - F/TR unfortunately includes .308 & .223 bolt guns against which my "out of the closet" rifle could not be competitive. Additionally, my 24" bull barrel .223 AR would also be included in the class.
I can see a subset of the F/TR to allow the .223 (and possibly. 308) AR as defined in the provisional rules competing in their own class. Any variants (caliber, >20" etc) would compete against the bolt guns.

 

[Dgd6mm]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Current status of NRA Tactical Mid-Range (Prone) AR:

The NRA High Power Rifle Committee met last weekend and voted to; (a) remove "provisional status" so as to make it a full NRA discipline; and, (b) create two classes of AR Platform rifles within the discipline, (1) .223/5.56, and (2) everything larger up to and including .308.

That was the first step. Those measures now go up to the larger Competitions Rules and Programs Committee and from there to the whole NRA Board for consideration. Nothing will be final until the NRA Board considers and votes on these measures.

Hope this helps the discussion,

John

I would just about bet this is the way it will go down for class separation.

 

[dcali]

They can say it’s not f class all they want, but it sure looks like f class to me. Might as well use the same targets.

The extra equipment rules aren’t a big deal. We do it all the time for CMP matches. It takes 30 seconds at registration to weigh your rifle and trigger. I’ve never seen someone knowingly use a caliber that wasn’t allowed. The ones that do are generally beginners and set straight pretty quickly.

The big targets will be cleaned in no time, especially if you allow long .223s, let alone a .243. That’s a problem. Classifications will be severely jacked up relative to other disciplines, but that’s less of a problem if you ask me. It sort of ruins the idea of classifications when everyone is a high master, but whatever. Working up the ranks is fun, but That’s not why I shoot at the end of the day.

The assumption that it’s going to be a beginner class is also not a good one. I would shoot it, and I’m not a beginner. People who want to compete are the ones who keep coming back. They’re going to buy the best equipment they can afford and they’re going to get better at shooting. Just the way it is. a true beginner is going to be way behind people with the right gear and a little practice.

I’d hate to see it turn into an x count competition where dropping one 9 knocks you out of contention.

 

[Dgd6mm]

This past weekend a veteran f class competition shooter to the left of me put up a 595 21x at 600 yards in fairly tough conditions, he was running a 6fatrat AR in Tactical class. A Teenager two targets over to my right was shooting f open, his score was a 594 30x. My score was a low 534 7x. I brought what I normally bring to the 600 yard line, 26" barreled .223, 75 grain Amax. I'm not there to be a HM, I'm there to shoot, enjoy the company of other competitors, and most of all have fun. I went home happy. My goal in the conditions, I was striving for a 540 in those conditions. I almost made it. I eventually will bring my AR .223 out.....for fun, not to make HM.

 

[XTR]

I've had a couple of concerns and suggestions for this class since it was proposed.

1. Competitors will "game" it. It's a game, we keep score, so competitors will do everything that is legal to gain advantage. Allowing large frame (308 based case) AR platforms is a significant mistake. In the end with two equally skilled shooters the one running a 243 is going to have an advantage over the one with a 223, and if the goal is to get some of the millions of 223s out then make it a 223 class, or make a 223 and an Open class, but don't make the M4 copies compete with a tricked out, purpose built 243.
   
2. 12x scopes are so 2007. Just like the 4.5x idea for service rifle*, the rules missed the reality that the mag limit they specified was no longer the norm, and that there were really no competition quality scopes in the mag range they specified. Even 14x is now off the back. Most major manufacturers make a high end 25-30x version and a step down 14-18x version of their high quality scope. Make the power limit something on the order of 18x or drop down and limit it to 8x where the high end AR platform scopes are running today.
   
3. Feed from a mag or allow sleds and get past mag length ammo. I don't get the panic from some people about feeding from the mag, CMP and NRA do it in rapids ever weekend, and it's in the spirit of the "tacticality" of the class. (yes, even in slow fire)
   
4. I think the class should use the F class center, but that's me, I think that built rifles will shortly be shooting 20x cleans.
   
5. Lastly, I'm ambivalent on whether or not to make it a real class. In any case if the powers that be want to keep the cost down, and get new people in the game they need to look seriously at #1 and #3 or it's not going to achieve the goal.

*I realize that is a nod to the ACOG

 

[Erud]

The trigger weight limit is a non-issue for match directors. I have never seen a single service rifle trigger weighed at any NRA match, even though NRA rule 3.1 states that a SR trigger must have “not less than 4.5# trigger pull”. If MD’s don’t need to weigh triggers on all of the service rifles at a MRP match, they certainly don’t need to weigh triggers on the two guys who show up to shoot this class.

 

[dcali]

This past weekend a veteran f class competition shooter to the left of me put up a 595 21x at 600 yards in fairly tough conditions, he was running a 6fatrat AR in Tactical class. A Teenager two targets over to my right was shooting f open, his score was a 594 30x. My score was a low 534 7x. I brought what I normally bring to the 600 yard line, 26" barreled .223, 75 grain Amax. I'm not there to be a HM, I'm there to shoot, enjoy the company of other competitors, and most of all have fun. I went home happy. My goal in the conditions, I was striving for a 540 in those conditions. I almost made it. I eventually will bring my AR .223 out.....for fun, not to make HM.

That's probably a high master score on a sling target.

 

[dcali]

1. Feed from a mag or allow sleds and get past mag length ammo. I don't get the panic from some people about feeding from the mag, CMP and NRA do it in rapids ever weekend, and it's in the spirit of the "tacticality" of the class. (yes, even in slow fire)
   

I've never understood this either. I wonder if it's a throw back to garands (and other older rifles), where it was more difficult to unload the rifles. With an AR it seems pretty trivial to drop a magazine out, eject a round if need be, and insert an ECI. It's one button press more than just unloading a single round. Loading up a full 22 rounds seems perfectly safe, has a benefit of enforcing a mag length ammo rule, and is one fewer pieces of gear to buy.

 

[kzin]

I've never understood this either. I wonder if it's a throw back to garands (and other older rifles), where it was more difficult to unload the rifles. With an AR it seems pretty trivial to drop a magazine out, eject a round if need be, and insert an ECI. It's one button press more than just unloading a single round. Loading up a full 22 rounds seems perfectly safe, has a benefit of enforcing a mag length ammo rule, and is one fewer pieces of gear to buy.

And the CMP Games m1 carbine match slow-fire is shot from loaded magazines.

And rimfire sporter slow-fire is shot from loaded magazines.

I've heard the single load comes all the way from the first mag-fed bolt rifles. The generals didn't want the troops wildly spraying from mags so mandated single load slow fire unless ordered to load a mag. That carried to the practice range. That carried to the competition range. could all be BS but that's what I heard

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

I've had a couple of concerns and suggestions for this class since it was proposed.

• 1- Competitors will "game" it. It's a game, we keep score, so competitors will do everything that is legal to gain advantage. Allowing large frame (308 based case) AR platforms is a significant mistake. In the end with two equally skilled shooters the one running a 243 is going to have an advantage over the one with a 223, and if the goal is to get some of the millions of 223s out then make it a 223 class, or make a 223 and an Open class, but don't make the M4 copies compete with a tricked out, purpose built 243.

Agreed, but we don't need more classes; it's just a total pain in the butt to track and deal with. I always thought it was completely stupid to allow any caliber in this so-called "AR" class, but since there's really no main reason for the class in the first place, I guess anything goes.

Restricting it to .223/5.56 ONLY is a decent idea, but I guess that would mean I can't play with my AR-10.

• 2- 12x scopes are so 2007. Just like the 4.5x idea for service rifle*, the rules missed the reality that the mag limit they specified was no longer the norm, and that there were really no competition quality scopes in the mag range they specified. Even 14x is now off the back. Most major manufacturers make a high end 25-30x version and a step down 14-18x version of their high quality scope. Make the power limit something on the order of 18x or drop down and limit it to 8x where the high end AR platform scopes are running today.

There is no rhyme or reason for the magnification limit on the scope, it's like somebody pulled a number out of their gluteous maximus and said "let's use that!" Same method that was used to come up with the 7 second delay on the eTargets. There was no thought given to it and it shows. I kinda like an 8X or 10X limit, much more prevalent in the industry, especially since they are insisting on the regular targets.

• 3- Feed from a mag or allow sleds and get past mag length ammo. I don't get the panic from some people about feeding from the mag, CMP and NRA do it in rapids ever weekend, and it's in the spirit of the "tacticality" of the class. (yes, even in slow fire)

Yes, the CMP and NRA do it in the rapids. But that's not the issue. I'm looking at it from an MD viewpoint as it pertains to safety. Right now the prone matches are, well, all prone. It's all single round load and the few who do have detachable box magazines either use a sled (I did for a long time) or load on top of the magazine. No one loads from a magazine and definitely no one loads more than one round in a magazine. (Yes, I have had to deal with a yahoo who came to match some months back and loaded up a mag and started shooting. He was stopped really quickly.)

As an MD, I do not have to worry about people having more than one round in the rifle at any one time. Even in XTC, the prone position is shot single load. I have seen some strange gun handling when dealing with a magazine from prone, imagine with a full mag.

The rapids are a very specific stage and it is all shot at the same time in a very short time. Fired and done in one minute. Everybody, all the shooters.

If this class is "designed" to attract anyone who has an AR, we are inviting people with no competition experience and unknown shooting experience to come in and load up a full mag alongside people with genormous single shot rifles that can only be pointed downrange. This way lies insanity and danger.

• 4- I think the class should use the F class center, but that's me, I think that built rifles will shortly be shooting 20x cleans.

Agreed. Then again, it will be more difficult for a newbie to make High Master in a few matches. It will be more demanding, more of an accomplishment.

• 5- Lastly, I'm ambivalent on whether or not to make it a real class. In any case if the powers that be want to keep the cost down, and get new people in the game they need to look seriously at #1 and #3 or it's not going to achieve the goal.

*I realize that is a nod to the ACOG

I don't know what the goal truly is. If the NRA is cheapening the competition to attract shooters, I think that's a tremendous disservice to everyone. I'm old enough to remember the comments from the sling shooters when F-class was first sanctioned. Thankfully the NRA had enough foresight to issue the F-class center targets otherwise this would have been a rather short-lived class. Instead it has grown quickly and has evolved and it is still very competitive especially at 1000 yards.

Yes, you have to spend money and make an effort to be competitive nowadays but you can still come and shoot with your AR in .223 in F-TR and have fun. So you won't win much against the folks with dedicated match rifles; big deal, that's why we have classifications and at our club we reward the winners in each classification.

So you won't make high master in 2 matches, is that a big issue and if so, why is it a problem? I should think the classification should reflect the talent and the commitment, not be used as a participation trophy.

 

[Keith Glasscock]

Silly question for those that have gained classification cards from shooting AR-Tactical class:

Does the classification card say F-class or something else?

From the standpoint of a "gateway" game, giving F-Class classification cards on an easier target would create a group of "victims" when they move up to the real F-class target.

I see that as counter-productive for the sport in general. I can't image shooting HM scores in AR-tactical after a couple of months, followed by not being able to shoot solid Marksman scores, all while paying entry fees to fund everyone else's fun for years. All of that while barely able to get up off of the bottom of the page...

 

[Keith Glasscock]

The above post is to suggest, if the NRA hasn't already done so, to either limit or change the classification(s) gained from shooting on the bigger target.

Here are a few ideas that might help:
1) Limit AR-tactical to a "Master" classification (no High-master available) - I think this would be a nightmare for everyone involved. Murphy would be in charge full-time as classifications came out.
2) Make AR-tactical an "unreported" class. No classification cards to worry about, and match directors would not need to try to separate scores.
3) Give AR-Tactical specific classification cards. This would somewhat take Murphy out of the driver's seat for the remainder of F-class.

 

[kzin]

Silly question for those that have gained classification cards from shooting AR-Tactical class:

Does the classification card say F-class or something else?

From the standpoint of a "gateway" game, giving F-Class classification cards on an easier target would create a group of "victims" when they move up to the real F-class target.

I see that as counter-productive for the sport in general. I can't image shooting HM scores in AR-tactical after a couple of months, followed by no being able to shoot solid Marksman scores, all while paying entry fees to fund everyone else's fun for years. All of that while barely able to get up off of the bottom of the page...

Definitely not f-class.

I thought it was a Prone classification(same as sling)

In another forum I googled into they were saying the cards have been specific with 'AR Tactical' on them.

 

[Keith Glasscock]

Definitely not f-class.

I thought it was a Prone classification(same as sling)

In another forum I googled into they were saying the cards have been specific with 'AR Tactical' on them.

That sounds perfect! Thanks for the info!

 

[GSS]

Yes, the CMP and NRA do it in the rapids. But that's not the issue. I'm looking at it from an MD viewpoint as it pertains to safety. Right now the prone matches are, well, all prone. It's all single round load and the few who do have detachable box magazines either use a sled (I did for a long time) or load on top of the magazine. No one loads from a magazine and definitely no one loads more than one round in a magazine. (Yes, I have had to deal with a yahoo who came to match some months back and loaded up a mag and started shooting. He was stopped really quickly.)

As an MD, I do not have to worry about people having more than one round in the rifle at any one time. Even in XTC, the prone position is shot single load. I have seen some strange gun handling when dealing with a magazine from prone, imagine with a full mag.

I 100% agree with all above.

We have five 600 yard ranges within under 2 hours from my home range in Merrimack New Hampshire.
We shoot many 200 - 600 XTC and Prone matches at all of these clubs each year

All of these clubs have the high concern of the impacts of a round going over the impact berm and leaving the range.
One round out could get a padlock on the gate and the whole club shut down.

All 5 clubs have Very Strick muzzle horizontal or lower whenever closing the bolt on a live round
Also only prone and single loading allowed form the 600 yard line
( Only exception is pre approved Rattle Battle Practice )

None of these clubs now allow loading up a magazine and shooting prone from 600.
It would be written into any NRA Approved, Registered or Regional Event Program being submitted to the NRA that all firing from 600 yards prone will be single load ONLY. We would never allow firing from a magazine with more than one round in it. I / we would not care if they use a sled or not.

These are the rules these clubs have in place and all that attend matches there must comply if they want to shoot at these clubs.

George
https://nfga.org/high-power-rifle/