Legality issues with Seb rest on competition

[johara1]

The rule is 1/2 clearance from the bag retainer nothing is said about a fore end stop. post #20 shows it plain as day it is too close to the fore end. As both the level and the fore end stop have screws that go through them they are part of it. ….. jim

 

[jeff walker]

If you were going to cite a rule to deal with the for end stop, it would fall into the verticle 1/2" contact rule. But then again it could be said that the fore end stop would have to be filled with sand...etc.

I personally feel that this whole issue is childish at best and NOT what the intention of the rule was when written. BUT ..... It is specifically stated in the rules. This is the difference between this issue and your comment about the for end stop.

 

[Judd]

This is easily fixed JamesTN....send me the rest and I'll send you cost + 100 + shipping and all your problems will be solved

Well it needed to be said.

Generally speaking having to many rules can be just as damaging as not having enough. Tough to find the balance. I've always said if you can't fit your rules on front and back of an 8 1/2 x 11" sheet of papers...you have WAY to many rules.

Good luck guys.

 

[johara1]

Jeff, i do know when this issue was hashed around two years ago it was the same deal, and i do know that the world open at williams port made them remove the level and the fore end stop to shoot i was told. I made a lot of calls as to this to the IBS and the issue is still the same as it was two years ago. I really don't care anymore but why not shoot a 18 lb. light gun, i don't see to gain by more weight. Why even weigh them. Farley had to comply to be legal, The ears can only touch 1/2" of the side of the fore end try that with a NEO or most other rest. Why have rules if you don't in force them, bend some and in force some. I ask about the forming a group that would address these things but that didn't fly. Maybe you can organize the rules and get them in black and white and no gray. Just like the benches, something should be in place on the sizes. …….. James O'Hara

 

[jeff walker]

Jim. Give me a SPECIFIC example of a rule that was followed, and a specific example of where the rule wasn't followed. Then back it up with an accurate quote from the rulebook. Not something you heard about, but something you actually saw.

There are people working on the rulebook issues. So check your facts before making these sorts of inflammatory statements sir. You must have a reason for thinking nothing is being done, what is that reason ? It hasn't happened fast enough ? Nobody is checking in with you ? It definitely isn't because you contacted the leadership and asked.

 

[jeff walker]

Also Jim. You obviously care because you are always vocal in these issues. So instead of "why don't you do this and why don't you do that ?" Why don't you, Jim, draw up the agenda items and get the signatures. It doesn't have to be the committees tgat do this.

 

[Waskawood]

Any part of the rifle resting there on must maintain a minimum of one/half inch distance from any part of the retainer or container holding the sand bag on which the rifle rests.

from any part of the retainer or container holding the sand bag


Waska's input is scrutinized BS only....

I'm sorry my post appeared to come across that way. My comments come from the picture where they guy makes it legal by putting a piece of leather under the bag to raise it above the piece holding the arm to the rest. My comment was just trying to state that if that piece has to maintain the 1/2 inch would it all. Sorry once again for my ignorance. Not trying insight anything, just trying to learn like you all.

 

[johara1]

Jeff, Sorry, i'll refer you to page 28 A # 7, it is all right there. as it was two years ago…… as posted in red in many places on this thread. I moved on so it doesn't affect me anymore,and it didn't move anywhere the first time. I don't think we need an agenda drawn up just a simple decision on the current rules that are posted on BRC. Yes or no then we can live by it…….jim

 

[rwh38238]

Hey Guys, I have got a suggestion. Why don't we just let the shooters vote on it at every match? That seems to work even if it is a safety rule like muzzles being out in front of the benches. We can solve this with a simple vote. I vote to shoot 18 lb guns in Light Gun and we just count the best of 4 shots out of 5. James obviously doesn't shoot off a SEB or he would be on the other side of the fence. Don't worry James every vote counts!

Ryan Hunt

 

[johara1]

Ryan, I did,had 3 total…… All i'm trying to do is have them as two years ago say yes or no that they are legal. I don't have a dog in this fight anymore. I would say two years is sufficient time to make a decision on equipment or form a group to look at new equipment and tell you if it's legal.
How many matches do you go to that have a certified weight? How can you check a light gun? If it's in the rule book it should be enforced, if not why bother. The bench deal should of had some guide lines in place a lot of years ago, somebody dropped the ball back then. All you can ask is for a level playing field……. jim O'Hara

 

[seb]

Seb, The rest is legal except for the fore end stop and the level that are attached to the hold down bar. ………. jim O'Hara

Jim, can you please tell me is this from what you read/get from the official rules, or just from your own opinion?

This thread has been read for 1600 times, but no one tells me WHERE IN ONE SINGLE-OFFICIAL MATCH the seb/neo rest is not allowed or ILLEGAL TO USE AS IS.
I am asking this because I know that my rests have been used in many shooting disciplines, plus the fact that I received hundreds or probably thousand emails from our customers but never once they told me they were banned or DQ'ed or must modify their neo rests or the bag to be legal.
Just point me with one single match, please. Then I'll say thank you sir! & probably change my bag/top design.

Also RE-READ my post #38 in reply to JamesnTN.
I'll copy it again here: (my apology in bold)
1. We make both 3pc (adjustable width) bags & 1pc (fix) bag. The rest comes with one of them, as per customer's request.

2. Both bags exceed the minimum size measurement (I mean requirement), ETC, stated in the rules.
Rule is rule whether it's good, or "strange".

NEO front bags are approx. 1.75" wide, 3/4" to 7/8 " thick when filled in moderate hardness/not too hard, and tapered on the sides so you can lift your stock/rifle easily upward.
So - installed, our front bags protude MORE than half inch thick - counts from the the top of the leveler/stopper's joint.
I mean the bag is over than 1/2" from any part of the top/container/retainer/leveler/stopper.

Of course you won't shoot off of an empty bag.
Of course as the bag is pliable it's more depend on how you treat the bag & tension.
Ask anyones to lift the rifle upward.
Ask anyones to check for the full contact bottom and 1/2" on the sides, too.
Even if your stock has two or ten inches "flat" on the sides (vertically), I can tell you that you have no more than 1/2" contact on the sides due to the bag taper.
That's easy.


And by the way Jim, unless you bought my rests used from other shooter (what for if so?) you never had 3 NEO rests!
I'd guess that you do not know my new/current rests.

Please be fair, thanks!

My apologies if this sounds rude.

seb.

 

[seb]

Please be advised that the rest/top/bag shown in post #20 was the old rest (2010 or 2011 made). The new/current rests (mid 2012 and up) have adjustable lever on each side of the side plate, has thicker bag, lower placement of foreend stop & leveler.

And again we make 3pc adjustable bag and 1pc bag.

Anything else/issue let me know, thanks.

seb.

 

[johara1]

Seb, I hope your right when i had mine they didn't comply to the rules of a 1/2" clearance. Now on BRC it is stated that if set your rifle on the front rest and your rear bag and it will have the prescribed 1/2" clearance including the level and the attachment for the fore end stop it good to go. If it doesn't you will need to do something to get it. Remember you can only have a 1/2" up the side also, without trapping it. So i hope this works out.
Yes sir i got one from you, and new one from an other shooter and i turned down a Max. I did use one at 1000 yds. but sold them. As you say i don't know your current one and i am fair, is the best thing going when you need to move around but at a 1000 yds you don't need to, tracking and fine adjustment is needed. You make i fine product, and i guess you made a change that will make it legal. Other manufactures have equipment that didn't meet the requirements and you fix it no big deal. The single bag rule, i don't know for sure on that but i thought it was OK, but from what Jeff wrote i don't know. ……. jim

 

[seb]

Jim, I was just very confused (and a bit upset honestly) why did you always ignore my explanations/ the fact that our new (mid 2012 & up) rests have thicker bag etc - 'cause I've already told about that for several times but you're always referring to the old production rest, which is not up to date.
Now it's clear as day light & forgotten.
seb.

 

[johara1]

Seb, I am glad it has cleared the air after two years. I wish you the best on a very well made rest………… jim

 

[JamesnTN]

Well I hated to do it but I notched the bar that the front stop and the bubble sits on so that now they sit flush with the bag retainer bar. The bar is still one piece I just machined it so that both questioned parts are now sitting down in the bar instead of on top.

So hopefully I'm legal no matter what.

Seb the work and detail put into this is top grade you're an excellent machinist and designer. My apologies if this debate on the rest has caused any negative responses towards you and your products as my intent was to make sure without any doubt this rest is 100% legal when I compete.

 

[seb]

James, no worries.
Thank you for choosing my rest for your shooting needs, and good luck!

Jim, thank you.

seb.