limiting bullet weight for FTR competitions

[Ahhnother8]

Most of the "Palma" shooters I know shoot 185 Bergers, not a 155 or 155.5 anything.

It's just the opposite here. We all shoot 155's. But we all shoot internationally too.

I have fired in two F-class Nationals, both times with 155's (SMK 2155 & 2156). It isn't a matter of "jealousy", "someone not in the top 20", "Master class scores", "against advancements in their respective discipline", "wants everyone else to be held back so they are able to do better". It is a matter of cost containment. Even professional sports have done it with salary caps, tire rules, minimum weight rules, exotic materials rules, maximum turbo boost rules, etc. Yes, these pertain mostly to racing, but they also realized things were on the wrong path.

With each new bullet, a different powder and barrel twist are needed to optimize it. Not to mention what to do with the thousands of bullets and jugs of powder that are no longer a competitive edge. Nothing wrong with technological advancements, that is why there is an Open class.

Oh, and classification and scores mean nothing!! Only ones position in the match results are relevant to my interests.

Lane
NRA F-TR classification - Expert

 

[ARIZONA_F_CLASS]

They have limits. It's called palma shooting.

 

[XTR]

If you want to shoot 155s by all means do so. I could never get the 2156 to shoot in any of my rifles. Back in the late 80s when I shot USPSA/IPSC, before there were any categories I chose to shoot 45ACP. I'm sure that Merle Eddington never considered me to be competition but I was punching holes and having fun. It was what I wanted to do, was I at a disadvantage compared to a 38 Sooper, sure, but I was doing what I wanted.

Most of the "Palma" shooters I know shoot 185 Bergers, not a 155 or 155.5 anything.

With each new bullet, a different powder and barrel twist are needed to optimize it. Not to mention what to do with the thousands of bullets and jugs of powder that are no longer a competitive edge. Nothing wrong with technological advancements, that is why there is an Open class.

Lane
NRA F-TR classification - Expert

Innovation, we don't want any of that in F-TR; you better choose a powder and brass, and barrel length while you are at it. Heaven forbid a new better scope comes along.

 

[ARIZONA_F_CLASS]

Heaven forbid a new better scope comes along.

What??

 

[Dgd6mm]

Well said bayou shooter, XTR and ShootDots.

DITTO...... ;D

 

[CZ550]

Why do Sling and Irons and Fclasser's wanna measure d#$ks all the time makes absolutely no sense.

And the don't compete if its a hobby theory. (well that's just stupid)

What separates 1st place from 20th place for the most part is time invested, and or lack of non shooting obligations. And I mean no disrespect to those that are fortunate enough to persue Fclass or any shooting sport to its fullest. But for 95% it will never be anything other than a hobby.

 

[Ahhnother8]

What separates 1st place from 20th place for the most part is time invested, and or lack of non shooting obligations. And I mean no disrespect to those that are fortunate enough to persue Fclass or any shooting sport to its fullest. But for 95% it will never be anything other than a hobby.

Yes, marksmanship skills are what should separate the competitors, but many try to relegate skill to a secondary position by continually trying to come to the race with more "horsepower" than the competition. And the incremental costs of those last few horses is ridiculous. But to stay at the top, that is what is becoming necessary.

Not too long ago, a good shooter could show up with a stock Savage, a quality match rifle, or even Remington 700 or 40-X and immediately be competitive. That is no longer possible, with the long throated chambers and heavy bullets. The barriers to competitive entry have been raised and will continue to increase over time. A high skill level will not be enough to be competitive without the requisite horsepower.

At least pretty much any decent scope that will hold a zero will work. With mirage, there really isn't much technology has been able to do to help us to see through it or to make the target hold still. Maybe that will change at some point.

Yes, it is a hobby, for all but the military shooters. The level of passion for the hobby varies among competitors. If this game is ever taken away from us, though depressing, no one will be unable to support or feed their families because of it. Hopefully the fish will still be biting... :-\

With this much passion for the sport, I would assume that everyone is going to Raton?!

Lane
2006 U.S. Nationals F-Class TR - 4th place

 

[mao0720]

^ x 1,000,000!
It about getting maximum participation not leveling he playing field. If you want to shoot 230s out of your 18.18lb rig and take the recoil , have fun. If you prefer 155 SMK palmas because their cheap and the shoot well, good for you too. Every load has its trade off... The playing field is as even now as it ever will be.

 

[6BRinNZ]

Something else to consider - if the comps are only going to be competed over the longs, then the rifles will become specialised to meet that...my money would be on the same skill level guy shooting 155s if the matches were over 300-1000 vs the guy shooting 210s plus over 300-1000.

Yes I know that you wouldn't shoot 210s at 300 but what is he going to do compromise, and shoot 185s, get a second rifle specialised for 300-600?

Both classes are running into issues with recoil..yet there is a bulletin that shows stock designs are being worked on to handle the recoil...maybe before too long shooting heavies won't be such an issue...then there might be no way to compete unless you have a recoil managing stock...blah blah to weight..that is just about buying expensive light weight materials...there is a crowd that manufacturer titanium actions for instance.

I can't help but wonder a change such as bringing back the shorts and restricting shooters to one rifle per comp (not match), unless there is failure, will have a much greater effect on keeping the intent of the class than something such as restricting bullet weight.

IMO there is a lot to consider when looking at the intent of the class and where technology and cost will take us...unfortunately the writing is on the wall.

 

[ARIZONA_F_CLASS]

But i for one oppose any such limit, i have spent nearly a year fine tuning my load and my rifle for the 210's.

This is EXACTLY why there should be a limit. The quote above put another way: "I spent a LOT of time and money to develop a competitive EQUIPMENT advantage in an amateur sport/hobby." For many, that is more appealing than becoming a better marksman and wind reader. And for others, that kind of financial commitment is not even an option. Again, in an AMATEUR sport/hobby.

And in lieu of a bullet weight cap, a cartridge overall length cap would be just as effective and EASY to enforce.

No offense to the OP, and others of the same mindset. Just my perspective...

Lane

What separates 1st place from 20th place for the most part is time invested, and or lack of non shooting obligations. And I mean no disrespect to those that are fortunate enough to persue Fclass or any shooting sport to its fullest. But for 95% it will never be anything other than a hobby.

With this much passion for the sport, I would assume that everyone is going to Raton?!

Lane
2006 U.S. Nationals F-Class TR - 4th place

As much complaining as you are doing about it being a hobby and not fair because of bullet weights. You sure like throwing up your place at the Nationals.

 

[XTR]

Yes I know that you wouldn't shoot 210s at 300 but what is he going to do compromise, and shoot 185s, get a second rifle specialised for 300-600?

Both classes are running into issues with recoil..yet there is a bulletin that shows stock designs are being worked on to handle the recoil...maybe before too long shooting heavies won't be such an issuel...then there might be no way to compete unless you have a recoil managing stock...blah blah to weight..that is just about buying expensive light weight materials...there is a crowd that manufacturer titanium actions for instance.

There is probably a legit point to the one rifle per com idea; that said, I've already got a 223 set up with 80Amax's to shoot 600 the few times a yr I shoot it, and if I can get it to run the 90VLDs (working on that headache right now) I'll shoot it at 800 and 900.

I currently have 3 rifles set up for F-TR, two 308s and a 223. One of the 308s has an old barrel and is throated to do load development on the heavies, the other is set up for 185s.

 

[Ahhnother8]

Something else to consider - if the comps are only going to be competed over the longs, then the rifles will become specialised to meet that...my money would be on the same skill level guy shooting 155s if the matches were over 300-1000 vs the guy shooting 210s plus over 300-1000.

Yes I know that you wouldn't shoot 210s at 300 but what is he going to do compromise, and shoot 185s, get a second rifle specialised for 300-600?

Both classes are running into issues with recoil..yet there is a bulletin that shows stock designs are being worked on to handle the recoil...maybe before too long shooting heavies won't be such an issuel...then there might be no way to compete unless you have a recoil managing stock...blah blah to weight..that is just about buying expensive light weight materials...there is a crowd that manufacturer titanium actions for instance.

I can't help but wonder a change such as bringing back the shorts and restricting shooters to one rifle per comp (not match), unless there is failure, will have a much greater effect on keeping the intent of the class than something such as restricting bullet weight.

IMO there is a lot to consider when looking at the intent of the class and where technology and cost will take us...unfortunately the writing is on the wall.

6BRinNZ, very good points. Gstaylorg had a number of good points too. There are a number of ways to improve the sport, while maintaining the original intent. Mr. Farquharson was a fullbore shooter who put a scope and bipod on his fullbore rifle to continue to compete. Fullbore shooting has a bullet weight limit both internationally and in the U.S.

Until recently there was also a rifle weight limit. Not sure when or how F-TR abandoned the bullet weight limit, while maintaining the rifle weight limit. It's also interesting the SAAMI chamber specs clearly show a MAX OAL length of a loaded round (2.810"), which is summarily ignored.

The f-open guys went through the two gun scenario. F-tr could end up going that route also. That would likely be bad for the sport. As mentioned, the rifle weight issue will eventually come into play also. Carbon fiber bipods are here. Carbon fiber stocks and lightweight actions will allow longer barrels and even more velocity. And soon enough, exotic barrel and bullet materials and/or coatings. And don't even mention duplex powder loads. Sounds exciting, but likely not good for the sport.

The ultimate question is: what is in the best interest of the sport?

This discussion has been interesting and informative.

On a side note, what relay one is squadded on in Raton will likely determine the ultimate outcome as much as anything. It's all good and fair for the team matches, as they all shoot at the same time. Not so much for the individuals. The squadding will be as fair as possible, but luck will have some influence. Have been on both ends of that lottery in Raton.

Lane
the wind is MY friend...

 

[XTR]

Lane, we get it, you want to shoot Full Bore with a scope and bipod. By a wade majority the rest of the shooting community disagrees with you.

From the poll Daryl conducted here last yr:

Keep the current unlimited bullet weight. (52.8%)
Cap max bullet weight at 201 grains. (24.9%)
Cap max bullet weight at 156 grains (22.3%)

The arguments you make now were made then, and they were rejected. The results you see there are similar to the results that he got on three or four different internet boards. If you change the parameters and give people two choices 155's or no limits I'll wager a few beverages that number goes to something much closer to 70/30 than 52/48.

The game as played is the one that most people are happy with, by the way, in that poll I voted for 201, today I"d be in the unlimited group. I don't see more rules as helpful to the sport.

 

[Bluto65]

Bluto,

Those that you are laughing at, have you offered help to them so that what ever it is that they may be doing wrong, they may be able to improve, or are you one of those that just stand back and watch folks founder?

Shooters in High Power disciplines dont let others flounder, we belong to a very nice and friendly community, on the contrary Frog. I help out as much as I can but since others are sometimes in the know-it-all attitude any advice goes in one ear and out the other.
Most of the switchers are Hi Masters in sling or FTR, why switch to F-Class open? I dunno maybe they are getting bored or losing abilities due to age. The more so to take friendly advice and apply it, if they dont then they flounder on their own.

 

[Ahhnother8]

By a wade majority the rest of the shooting community disagrees with you.

From the poll Daryl conducted here last yr:

Keep the current unlimited bullet weight. (52.8%)
Cap max bullet weight at 201 grains. (24.9%)
Cap max bullet weight at 156 grains (22.3%)

So, a "wide majority" is 53% to 47%?

This is simply a discussion of where things are headed and is it good for the sport. There are a lot of views of this thread, so apparently this discussion is of some interest. Likely being viewed by 47% in favor and 53% opposed to changes. So, if another poll goes the other way, would that "wide majority" mean that things should be immediately changed? Of course not, the discussion would just continue.

Will we see anyone posting/viewing here in Raton?

Lane
Screwing on a new barrel with the Team chamber next week and loading up the "heavies". Is 46.5 grains of Varget too much?

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

No. A wide majority did not want to cap the weight at the Palma 155.5gr 78% to 22%.

Yes, I will be in Raton again this year and if you want to discuss it further, I will condescend to grant you the inestimable privilege of allowing you to buy me a drink.

 

[6BRinNZ]

Lane, we get it, you want to shoot Full Bore with a scope and bipod. By a wade majority the rest of the shooting community disagrees with you.

From the poll Daryl conducted here last yr:

Keep the current unlimited bullet weight. (52.8%)
Cap max bullet weight at 201 grains. (24.9%)
Cap max bullet weight at 156 grains (22.3%)

The arguments you make now were made then, and they were rejected. The results you see there are similar to the results that he got on three or four different internet boards. If you change the parameters and give people two choices 155's or no limits I'll wager a few beverages that number goes to something much closer to 70/30 than 52/48.

The game as played is the one that most people are happy with, by the way, in that poll I voted for 201, today I"d be in the unlimited group. I don't see more rules as helpful to the sport.

I don't know that they do disagree, they just disagree with the proposal which was a bullet cap....

I suspect if a poll was started that asked if people were happy with the current direction of FTR a different outcome would present...it is still early days for the heavies....and the effect of innovation in stock designs and bipods to manage recoil and torque is yet to be seen.

I think the intent of Darryls question was right but the mistake he made was going straight to a solution...

While I don't like where the equipment and expense is going I don't agree with a bullet cap as the solution and voted accordingly.

Lets see if in 2-3 years the call for change is louder.

Good luck all.