New F-Class 600 Yard Target

[Petros284]

Not sure if many are aware but according to a manufacturer of the Official NRA F-Class Targets the numbering on the MR-1FC 600 Yard target is vertical like the International target. The numbering along the center waterline is no longer. This change occurred in October. The target I saw also included a 5 Ring. Ring sizes are the same as before. I thought this was interesting since I have not seen or heard of this change. Many of you out there aware of this? Not sure if this is across the board for the long range targets. I know I liked the center waterline as reference.

 

[ShootDots]

View attachment 1028241

Not sure if many are aware but according to a manufacturer of the Official NRA F-Class Targets the numbering on the MR-1FC 600 Yard target is vertical like the International target. The numbering along the center waterline is no longer, This change occurred in October. The target I saw also included a 5 Ring. I thought this was interesting since I have not seen or heard of this change. Many of you out there aware of this? Not sure if this is across the board for the long range targets. I know I liked the center waterline as reference.

I did not know this! However, it appears that the NRA is following the lead of what the 500 yards targets look like. Since I moved to Arizona last year, I have shot many 500 yard matches. Not having the "numbered waterline" if you will, in my opinion does make the 500 yard targets "seem" to be more difficult to shoot..

 

[kzin]

That looks like the old big 6 ring split into a 6 AND a five

either a big change or a mistake

the existing 5 ring is white

 

[Immike]

That looks like the old big 6 ring split into a 6 AND a five

either a big change or a mistake

the existing 5 ring is white

It had to be pasted over a full sized sling target to get that.

 

[Dos XX]

I like the vertical numbers. I often hold on the number itself.

 

[kzin]

ok
I only ever refer to the 300 and 600 in the rules.
I've never noticed the 500 had been redone inconsistently with those(small 5 and 6 in the black, nothing in the white). Wonder when.
the 500 'sling'(not f) is also different

Apparently they are catching at least the f 600 up with the 500.
I wonder about the 'sling' 600, the 300's and all the rest?

 

[Jay Christopherson]

eh, if they are going to change the 600 yard target, make it smaller (make ALL the MR targets smaller IMO). I prefer the horizontal numbers.

 

[Ringostar]

Interesting new target. I think that it will take some time before a lot of ranges get changed over though.

 

[kzin]

eh, if they are going to change the 600 yard target, make it smaller (make ALL the MR targets smaller IMO). I prefer the horizontal numbers.

They are making them smaller.
Only at the outer rings that barely matter, though.

 

[Petros284]

Personally I think it’s time to shrink the entire target. It would definitely be more interesting.

 

[Heman]

Interesting I wonder if the regular MR1 has changed also. I know the MR65 is a decimal all the way out to the 5 ring where as the MR was just MOA out to the 8 ring and then it became 2 moa for the 7-5 ring which is the 6 and 5 ring for F-class.

 

[243Mendoza]

Interesting I wonder if the regular MR1 has changed also. I know the MR65 is a decimal all the way out to the 5 ring where as the MR was just MOA out to the 8 ring and then it became 2 moa for the 7-5 ring which is the 6 and 5 ring for F-class.

I think the MR has half min 10, 9 rings and 1 min 8, 7,6,5 rings so the new fclass mr target is changed quite a bit and cannot be used for sling shooters.

 

[dannyjbiggs]

Interesting new target. I think that it will take some time before a lot of ranges get changed over though.

When I indicated that I "liked" Jay's comment above, it was primarily for his preference for "horizontal numbering". Now, we really need to watch out for over shrinking the target rings! Surely you have noticed what a pain-in-the-a-- it is to paste shot holes on the 300-yard targets in fulbore? And especially, some "pit pasters" can be rather careless in positioning their pasters to the point that the X-ring may soon be obliterated before mid-string. So, do we want that to be the case for other mid-range targets as well? (Goodness me; seems I recklessly came up for another reason to use electronic targets. Forgive me; shame, shame, shame.)

Dan

 

[Jay Christopherson]

... (Goodness me; seems I recklessly came up for another reason to use electronic targets. Forgive me; shame, shame, shame.)

Dan

Too late! What I read was "Dan Biggs endorses using electronic targets to support reducing the target for mid-range". Ship it!

 

[Heman]

I think the MR has half min 10, 9 rings and 1 min 8, 7,6,5 rings so the new fclass mr target is changed quite a bit and cannot be used for sling shooters.

Steve you are correct I was refering to the sling target not the F-class target.

The newer target isn't an issue as far as we're concerned since we run electronic. We just put up the aiming blacks anyways. Makes it nice when fclass is done earlier sling shooters can go down on their targets switch it over and get scored properly. Especially if shooting irons never notice a difference.

 

[Keith Glasscock]

Is that the MR-1FCA that was introduced in the 2017 rule changes?

 

[Jetjock1]

View attachment 1028241

Not sure if many are aware but according to a manufacturer of the Official NRA F-Class Targets the numbering on the MR-1FC 600 Yard target is vertical like the International target. The numbering along the center waterline is no longer. This change occurred in October. The target I saw also included a 5 Ring. Ring sizes are the same as before. I thought this was interesting since I have not seen or heard of this change. Many of you out there aware of this? Not sure if this is across the board for the long range targets. I know I liked the center waterline as reference.

Pete
Could you contact me only email: hwalter2@earthlink.net
Thanks
Jetjock

 

[rardoin]

Is that the MR-1FCA that was introduced in the 2017 rule changes?

Is that not the adhesive repair centers that were in consideration for approval? I hope so.

 

[Ringostar]

When I indicated that I "liked" Jay's comment above, it was primarily for his preference for "horizontal numbering". Now, we really need to watch out for over shrinking the target rings! Surely you have noticed what a pain-in-the-a-- it is to paste shot holes on the 300-yard targets in fulbore? And especially, some "pit pasters" can be rather careless in positioning their pasters to the point that the X-ring may soon be obliterated before mid-string. So, do we want that to be the case for other mid-range targets as well? (Goodness me; seems I recklessly came up for another reason to use electronic targets. Forgive me; shame, shame, shame.)

Dan

I agree with Danny. I prefer the horizontal numbers, it gives more marks to use for holding off. And shooting 300 yds on a pulled target isn't fair to all shooters. The X ring can be covered by pasters quite quickly. From there on, it's the puller guessing whether your shooting X's or 10's. Many will judge it differently. The e targets will be more equal to all shooters.

 

[Heman]

No the MR1-FCA was just a smaller repair center for the MR1-F target. This appears to be a new target

Walt, since you're on here is there a new NRA target for 600yd f-class?