Question: Is F/TR becoming too specialized?

[1000yardstare]

OK......I am going to really stick my neck out here and predict that a few years from now the rifles will be so good that there will be only one type of F Class, the .308 against the 7mm BooBoo. If you want to punish yourself with the .223 at 1000 yds that is up to you. Use any type of front hardware you want. Not sure of what the weight limit will be. Hey, I`m not a voyeur!

International ICFRA will probably lead the charge. They changed F/TR to F/Restricted a couple years ago with no limit on bullet weight. Then changed it back to F/TR again no limit in bullet weight. I think because F/TR used less ink.

The U.S. will be slow to accept the change, if ever. But then they use that strange 10 ring target instead of the International 5 ring target. But that`s OK. I wouldn`t be able to buy reloading components if it weren`t for those great people south of my border.

So there you have it. One type of F Class. Just like F Class started, .308 only. But updated to shoot what you want any way you want.

Hurl your slings and arrows of outrageous fortune at me. I can take it!

Bill

 

[CacheCropp]

Okay, so just clear one thing up for me. What is the purpose of having a class that restricts use to 223/308 and bipod? Why not any cartridge? Why not any rest?

That is called F-Open. I attached an F-Class rule set. A bipod is not required in F-T/R. You could shoot sling if you are more comfortable with it. Sling weight must be included.

F-T/R and F-Open are what they are. They are variations of High Power shooting and not intended for any other purpose. Plenty of tactical matches exist for unknown distance, practical shooting. Both disciplines are good. Anything that safely burns powder can be fun and educational. Enjoy F-Class for what it is.

Okay, and I know what F-Open is. But why these specific restrictions? (cartridge and bipod) There are lots of other restrictions that would make much more sense in a purely target competition sense. Power factor maybe? Scope magnification? Trigger pull weight?

To me, the idea that F-T/R was created to lower cost hold no water. 308 lapua brass and VLD bullets are expensive whether you are buying for 308, 300 WM or 6.5x284. Sinclair bipods are not much less expensive than Hart front rests.

If F-T/R is an extension of service rifle, then maybe similar restrictions should be considered? 4.5# triggers. Sling only.

My point is, either F-T/R was not really well thought out and was not intended to really provide anything other than long range benchrest restricted to two cartridges. and as Laurie pointed out, maybe there are no ties to those two cartridges being Military rounds. If so, then it really seems like a random accident of a shooting class.

Or, F-T/R was intended to allow older service rifle shooters a way to stay in the game, so the thinking was, service rifle (223/308) shot strictly prone with a scope. In that context, I am not sure they intended it to be what it has become, even though it obviously is a great competition as it is.

 

[Steve Blair]

Well, our Mid-Range Regional last weekend was won (in F-Class) by German Salazar shooting a .308 Match rifle with a bipod and scope. He shot Sierra 190 Matchkings and won overall. He made no other modifications to the rifle. While he recuperates from shoulder surgery, this is a good way for him to keep burning powder.

You could make similar arguments to any shooting discipline. Why do the short range benchrest shooters have Hunter, LV, HV and Unlimited classes? Why do long range BR folks have heavy and light guns? In the latter case, light guns sometimes win in heavy class, too.

There must be some rule set to govern what is shot so that rifles do not need a crane to be brought to the line. Are the F-Class rules perfect? No, nothing is. My experience is that they are pretty good and allow for a lot of innovation that keeps it interesting. Rules do require adjustment occasionally. The target change is an example.

 

[CacheCropp]

You could make similar arguments to any shooting discipline. Why do the short range benchrest shooters have Hunter, LV, HV and Unlimited classes? Why do long range BR folks have heavy and light guns? In the latter case, light guns sometimes win in heavy class, too.

Hunter Benchrest is a perfect example. Here's an excerpt from this website's Hunter Benchrest page:

the Hunter class in Benchrest has mutated into full race BR rigs…much like NASCAR ‘stock cars’ or NHRA ‘Pro Stock’. The original intent of Hunter was for a class where the average person with an interest in accuracy could bring a good shooting hunting rifle and give BR a try.

Now, if the rules had been kept up to keep the Hunter class within sight of modern sporting rifles they wouldn't have mutated into what is effectively a mirror image of LV and HV classes. Just sayin'...

 

[Laurie]

OK......I am going to really stick my neck out here and predict that a few years from now the rifles will be so good that there will be only one type of F Class, the .308 against the 7mm BooBoo. [1000yardstare]

Bill,

I'm not sure about that, but ..... FWIW, reigning F/TR World Champion Russell Simmonds had the highest aggregate score overall a couple of weeks back in a GB F CA national league round on 309.26v (ex a possible 350.70v) after two matches each at 800 and 1,000yd v 307.9v for top F-Class shooter Tony Marsh. This was not an easy weekend with foul weather for some of the time and three quite separate wind conditions. The 60 strong field was very nearly split 50-50 between the classes, and so far as I know this is the first time ever that anybody has achieved this in a league championship round here , although the gap between the classes' scores has narrowed a lot over time. Mind you, Russell must smell the wind or read it with some sort of personal radar - he sees changes that nobody else does and the flags don't show!

If you want to punish yourself with the .223 at 1000 yds that is up to you. Use any type of front hardware you want.

Yes, I'm regularly accused of being some sort of masochist, but I like the Mouse Gun cartridge. It is a sign of how far the cartridge has been developed for long range in just the last four or five years - although as I know from personal experience, you could hit the old 2-MOA NRA Bull target at 1,000yd with .223 and the 80gn Sierra MK, it could, would never, ever be competitive! and ... I think that we have you Canadians very much to thank for this (alongside the more progressive bullet makers) having done so much of the groundwork in making the cartridge a feasible option.

 

[rocketron]

i think the biggest problem is enough people don't show up to make a class(5 shooters i think) by classification. high master, master,expert, etc.

if it could be broke down like this the guy shooting the factor rifle with a expert classification could win.

 

[memilanuk]

Maybe its just my skewed way of looking at things... but F/TR, as in F-Class / 'Target Rifle'... was meant to be a level(ish) playing field, the same as conventional Target Rifle (or Palma here in the states), bearing in mind that 'level playing field' doesn't necessarily mean 'lowest common denominator' or 'Bubba and his 700PSS'. Take a look at a Palma rifle, or a TR rifle, and then contemplate shooting in those classes with a stock M16-A2 looking Service Rifle or a hunting rifle with open sights. Yes, its quite doable, but it probably wouldn't be a very fun experience (depending on the individual).

That said... there is a movement in the US, specifically centered around Sacramento, where they have a *lot* of tactical class shooters who were coming out to shoot F-Class just to get long-range trigger time. Enough where they finally came up with their own 'Field Precision Rifle' class rules (they have a very willing and open-minded match director there) and have been reportedly having some success with it (and a satellite program in LA somewhere).

Here is a thread on the proposed rules if you're interested:

http://www.usrifleteams.com/lrforum/index.php?showtopic=13023&

As you'll probably see in the thread... I'm not 100% behind a few of the 'rules' (bullet weight limits, specifically) but over all I think its a decent idea. The 'con' argument is basically this: in some areas, yeah theres enough folks to break things out like this. In many others, there aren't enough people to support splitting out F/Open and F/TR at a lot of local/club level matches - this is just one more lay of complexity, further fragmenting a community that has barely even reached critical mass IMHO. But if it works, if it appeals to people... go for it.

I will say that some of the people I've spent time going 'round and 'round about the rules and classes and how they wanted their own little sandbox class... I'm fairly convinced that a lot of those folks are never going to truly get off their butts and out to the range regardless of how many classes you create to cater to them. You can't make all the people happy all the time... :

 

[cliffe]

I hesitated to reply to this, but I think I was in the same place Blueridge was a couple of years ago. I put together a cheapo stevens with a 6mmbr barrel in a varmint contour and a B&C medalist stock, something I could take varmint hunting but still shoot longer distance.
I have shot F/open a couple of times at a local range and had fun, but to compete with the guys with the seb rested, made to f/open rules in a 7mm @ 2900+ fps that can be shot 88 times a day because it is the max weight seems like a losing battle. but I just try to better MY score and still have fun.
I think the real question is if F/tr was opened up to any caliber how much bigger would the class get. most gun manufacturers are making how many of the newer cartridges like 6mmbr, 6.5 creedmore, 260 rem, etc.
NAH lets stick to the 223 and 308 its still 1980 isn't it.....LOL cliffe

 

[model 12 toby]

you should have to get on a tread mill and walk 3 miles with all equipment your going to use and they shouldn't be known distances. You should get 3 shots per target. 10 minutes per target and should be 4 to 8 targets. I would love to see that. If only i had a place to set this competition up I'd do it right now.

 

[Rustystud]

F-Class has its rules and it still has become an equipment race. If one does not like the discipline as it is then he or she has the option to shoot another discipline (or sit on the porch with the old dogs). Don't attempt to change something for others who have no problem with. The equipment race is good for the sport.

Furthermore, I beleive you will see a number of the Team US F-TR shoot stock factory Savage Rifles.

It is too bad Winchester, and Remington have not waked up to the F-Class market as a factory rifle offering. I would only assume they feel it is not a viable/profittable market. As a custom rifle builder there are plenty of customized Winchesters and Remingtons competing in F-Class wearing custom barrels, stocks, triggers, etc.

Yes, there are many Remington 700 clones out there because it is less expensive to make an F-Class accurate rifle from one made to precision specs than to correct the defects in a production rifle action.

Yes, Kelblys, Borden, Bat and many other custom action makers have found a market in F-Class shooting because they make high quality products.

In todays world you don't see the good ole boys going to a car dealership and buying a new car and racing it in a stock car race.

The bottom line to be competetive it still requires doing ones homework, putting in the hours of practice, shooting skills, and good equipment.

Nat Lambeth

 

[Erik Cortina]

What's next? Make them shoot factory ammunition because the new guy doesn't know how to handload and doesn't want to spend the money in handloading equipment? Or because the new guy feels at a disadvantage competing against guys who handload?

You have to find something that is within your limitations, why do you think I'm doing this and not playing professional football? ;D

 

[CacheCropp]

I think some of you are missing the point. It isn't about factory rifles or factory ammo. It isn't about whether the rules are fair. You could make the rules say everyone must have 50BMG with minimum 32" barrel and the rules would be fair, we all abide by them the same.

The question is, does having an F-T/R class accomplish what it set out to? And is a class needed that keeps the rifles using fairly standard width bipods and barrel lengths. Wouldn't such a class not only encourage shooters to bring their 700 PSS but also for manufacturers to design a better bipod that could be used by Police Snipers? Not sure it would need to be restricted to 223/308 either. Maybe a power factor to keep it sub-magnum and some rapid fire stages to encourage short actions. But why not welcome 243's, 260's, 6.5 Creedmoors and 6BR's?

Previously someone stated that they personally have seen lots of tactical wannabe's showing up to matches with leaves stuck on their rifles and they usually have no idea how to shoot. I say, these are EXACTLY the people you are trying to attract! These are the people you don't let get discouraged. You teach them how to shoot. In my experience, a lot of tactical guys found the sport all on their own, they are enthusiastic and they will soak up everything you teach them. Kids aren't growing up shooting like many of us did. They live in the suburbs, they play video games and no one teaches then to shoot. These people are the future of shooting sports and possible gun rights. You can let them wander about giving shooting a bad name or you can encourage them to shoot safely and pass on the torch.

 

[Erik Cortina]

BlueRidge, they already have a class that allows 243's, 260's, and 6.5 CM, it's called F-Open!

I think you are the one missing the point. The guys that have the fancy equipment are more than likely Master or High Master shooters. The new guys have their own group of guys they compete against in Sharpshooter or Marksman classification.

BluRidge, what discipline do you shoot? What do you use for equipment?
I'm just trying to understand where you are coming from.

 

[CacheCropp]

RyanJay11,

No sorry, didn't mean to insinuate fellow shooters aren't helpful or unwelcoming. I agree, my experiences have been pretty positive. There was a previous poster insinuating that there were "tactical" shooters showing up at matches, looking like idiots and then giving up after a match or two. I was addressing those remarks specifically.

As for F-T/R, it is fine like it is, just was asking people to consider what the purpose of having a class restricted to 223/308 and bipod. Was it a vision of 32" barrels and Sinclair F-Class bipods? Would it be an improvement to restrict F-T/R a little? or have another class that keeps things down to shorter barrels and standard use bipods?

Anyway, just thought it was a worthy discussion. Some people get defensive. I was really just asking, is F-T/R going the way of Hunter Benchrest and IPSC pistol comps where the firearms end up not resembling what was originally intended.

 

[fayettefatts]

Seems to me that many folks really are wanting a discipline that is more of a tactical format than a target rifle format. I don't have a problem with that. What I do disagree with is wanting to regulate or change the F class rules to accomplish this.

Tactical style rifles are legal and welcome in F/TR competition when used with a sling or bipod if they make weight. If you do not want to compete against rifles with long barrels and wide bipods, if you think high magnification scopes present an unfair advantage, if you don't like shooting fixed distance, if you want to shoot rapid fire, if you want to practice your police or military sniping skills, perhaps F Class is not quite what you are looking for.

And why should F Class shooters have to limit their rifles and equipment to what works well for your style of shooting? Perhaps a new format that better suits your needs is in order.

 

[spraynpray]

I have read this entire thread and have hesitated to post, but I feel compelled to do so.

Any time you have a game with rules there will be gamers. Period. F-TR is a game.

The IDPA analogy is false because you are fooling yourself if you don't think that the IDPA vests (with pockets for retaining magazines that sweep out of the way of the draw with little effort) are an example of gaming.

When USPSA created the production division, lots of IDPA-ers jumped the fence. Why? the rules were simpler. The simpler the rules are, the easier they are to enforce. Yes, there will be gamers, but that is inevitable.

Is it fair? yes. You are competing in the same rules as everyone else. Only if someone cheats is it unfair. You can commission a rifle to be built and load ammunition and shoot. If all the equipment was exactly the same, some people have better eyesight, or a steadier hand, or lower heart rate, etc.

The argument of practicality is unsound as well. Equipment aside, how practical is a discipline with sighters, wind flags, and every shot spotted for correction for any 'real world scenario'? Even if all the equipment was the same, it would still be a game.

Even the tactical matches are a game. Does the equipment play a role? Yes. Does a person with a better rangefinder have better odds of winning? Yes, but so does someone who is in better shape, or a person who has shot more. Are we going to start creating a class for people who can shoot 1000 yards off their back porch every day?

All said, I understand your question about whether this state of the game was envisioned at its inception. However, the spirit of the rules and the letter of the rules are rarely ever the same. The very nature of any highly competitive person is to have any advantage at their disposal within the rules of the game being played.

 

[cliffe]

all I thought on f/tr was let it be any caliber. more in line with a factory varmint rifle.
the way it is now if a guy shows up with a factory 243 varmint gun and a tasco scope he shoots in f/ open alongside the 22lb seb rested gun. the factory 243 has more in common with a f/tr gun than f/ open. is this so hard to figure out.....gosh if only i could make some colorful graphs ;D ;D ;D cliffe

 

[model 12 toby]

sounds like like shooting has lost it's purity?

 

[6BRinNZ]

Honestly if you want a cheap class where any caliber or setup is competitive, setup a class like what they have for soccer games in primary schools.

The rules are:

Everybody wins, nobody can say they lost and they all get a certificate.

 

[Erik Cortina]

Honestly if you want a cheap class where any caliber or setup is competitive, setup a class like what they have for soccer games in primary schools.

The rules are:

Everybody wins, nobody can say they lost and they all get a certificate.

LOL

And they can also have "do overs" in case they miss a big wind reversal! ;D