You've keep your guns this long, the way things are going you better pray to God someone is using the constitution against them instead of them using it against us!
This is still a free country lets keep it that way.
Joe Salt
Status of NRA rules, E-Targets, certification and records?
- Thread starter XTR
- Start date
This is still a free country lets keep it that way.
Joe Salt
TylerFromMS
Gold $$ Contributor
That's sort of my point. PRS and NRL22 were made from scratch. V2 is developing into something. There is a template to work with as far as rules for rifles, and FPR could be an actual thing instead of shoehorned in. A course of fire could be modified or kept the same, with provisions for e-targets and their "limitations".
It was mentioned that cards were turned in for scores based on the honor system. With electronic targets, you have the honor system and data. A waterline 7 called as a crossfire can be examined for angle and velocity.
I'll leave this thread with a quote from facebook that I read on electronic targets, verbatim: "the level of butthurt here is nearly on par with a touched/not touched line. or a miss because the puller pasted the hole before scoring. or running up a target with two marked shots because a paster fell. Or a "gimmie" mark for your buddy. Or a failed challenge that could have gone either way. Or "no hole! bullet must have blown up on that 20th X! shooter loses challenge, mark it a miss." The person who wrote this is certainly in the 5%.
XTR
F-TR obssessed shooting junkie
Someone needs to hold up a rule set (though it seems nobody is really interested in rules if they dont let them shoot in the target system of their choice) and before anyone waxes romantic about the CMP, I’ve followed some of the capricious BS from that organization in the world of Service Rifle. If you haven’t you have no idea. Super secret emails with unique interpretations, and don’t even start on the meteor shield shooting coat controversy. They don’t seem significantly different from the NRA. Kind of like when I was on subs, it sucked so bad guys would reup just to change boats.
In any case, that’s not what this thread is about.
flintcreek6412
Bob Petillo
People want places to shoot. E targets helps that a great deal. New ranges don't need to pour hundreds of yards of concrete, dig deep pits, install moving frames. etc. Simply move some dirt to create a berm and install e targets. I cannot fathom any new 1000yrd private ranges going to the expense of building pits because they will never get their return on investment.
Would Dead Zero exist if they had to build pits? I don't know but doubtful.
This is a hobby. No one makes a living at it. I have seen more temper tantrums and bruised egos in my few years of f class than I have in anything else I have ever participated in. But if f class isn't careful it may become the next XTC that no one wants to do. It's gotten ridiculous expensive to the exclusion of 95% of shooters. It's become an equipment and technology game that has strayed so far from the original intent it's kinda sad.
Why did only 20 people shoot FTR Mid Range at nationals this year? I mean heck, it was pulled targets where you were certain to get a well scored target.
Yes, ETs do have errors at times. But those errors average out both ways. I've never heard a single competitor ask me to verify if their 10 is really a 10 and not maybe a 9. NEVER.
My GPS navigation is off by a few yards but I don't go back to folding maps
My computer locks up but I don't go back to storing stuff in a file cabinet or using film photography
There are still bad calls in professional sports and bad lies in golf. Doesn't mean you quit and stop playing.
As I told my children, Life's not fair. Shit happens and you can either deal with it or obsess over it. Life's too short to get worked up over a cheap medal.
Would Dead Zero exist if they had to build pits? I don't know but doubtful.
This is a hobby. No one makes a living at it. I have seen more temper tantrums and bruised egos in my few years of f class than I have in anything else I have ever participated in. But if f class isn't careful it may become the next XTC that no one wants to do. It's gotten ridiculous expensive to the exclusion of 95% of shooters. It's become an equipment and technology game that has strayed so far from the original intent it's kinda sad.
Why did only 20 people shoot FTR Mid Range at nationals this year? I mean heck, it was pulled targets where you were certain to get a well scored target.
Yes, ETs do have errors at times. But those errors average out both ways. I've never heard a single competitor ask me to verify if their 10 is really a 10 and not maybe a 9. NEVER.
My GPS navigation is off by a few yards but I don't go back to folding maps
My computer locks up but I don't go back to storing stuff in a file cabinet or using film photography
There are still bad calls in professional sports and bad lies in golf. Doesn't mean you quit and stop playing.
As I told my children, Life's not fair. Shit happens and you can either deal with it or obsess over it. Life's too short to get worked up over a cheap medal.
TylerFromMS
Gold $$ Contributor
That is what I am proposing. George Farquharson was unable to compete with the current rule set at the time. He made up his own, borrowing from fullbore/highpower/whatever he shot. It has evolved into what we see today. And I believe we are seeing the next evolution.
Borrow from the F-Class rules, only implementing things for electronic targets (just like implementing rules for scopes and rests from Farquharson). Borrow from V2 with convertible sighters, string length, and target face. Hell, borrow the little timers from speed chess for pair firing.Sure, the purists would look down on it, just like the looks I get from sling guys when they are dehydrated from their coats and I'm enjoying the weather.
A rule book it an easy thing in the grand scheme of things. We have an existing structure. A more streamlined way of adjusting the rules as unforseen problems arise is something that the NRA lacks.
falconpilot
Gold $$ Contributor
Lots of State Championships are being fired on E-T today. Those championships happen once a year, and you think tough luck? You obviously don’t plan on shooting records then do you? There are lots of capable shooters today going a match knowing it’s possible to break a record on any string, and if we do, we want and deserve that record.
Last edited:
Agree. The effort that some people put into their shooting hobby is significant. If ur in the group of shooters who are just happy to go shoot a match, that is fine but don‘t let ur “participation trophy” attitude affect the competitor striving for excellence. An e target that malfunctions or is not accurate might be ok for practice but does not belong in anything but a club match.
The e target does save time due to no pit changes, but u miss that segment of the match where u actually get to go see ur target and where u put the holes. Plus the exchange of info that takes place has always been a valuable resource for many aspects of competition. I see many valid reasons to perform pit duty but I am sure that is not a popular idea.
I didn’t mean it that way. I’d love to set a record. I meant comparing records and championships between Etargets and pulled targets. There have been National championships and records on Etargets. They are all the same now. Too far down this rathole to change anything.
Registered matches are being shot on targets that do not meet the criteria set forth in the rules. Anyone want to argue that statement?
Change the rules or change the targets. That is where the debate lies. Until one is changed, we are ignoring a rule.
Why do we choose to ignore this but cause a stir over what kind of carpet someone is shooting on or what kind of rain shield someone is using? Some rules matter and some don't?
Change the rules or change the targets. That is where the debate lies. Until one is changed, we are ignoring a rule.
Why do we choose to ignore this but cause a stir over what kind of carpet someone is shooting on or what kind of rain shield someone is using? Some rules matter and some don't?
Last edited:
Ned Ludd
Silver $$ Contributor
As I'm reading through this thread, in my mind I'm hearing Butthead mutter, "Huh huh huh huh...e-targets".
As a long time and well-documented adversary of e-targets in F-Class, I recently purchased one for myself and have started shooting in our local F-Class matches once again, which have been switched over to e-targets. I like the e-target setup very much for practice/training purposes; however, not so much for matches, where I personally think it makes the overall experience into something lesser than it was with traditional pulled targets. Nonetheless, e-targets are here to stay in F-Class, regardless of whatever the NRA does or doesn't do, because once a venue has installed them, you can either choose to participate or stay at home. Like it or not, that's the choice at most venues.
It seems as though what the NRA does about e-targets really doesn't matter much in a practical sense, except with regard to record-keeping. Nothing the NRA does will change the outcomes of events fired on e-targets. Further, if they choose to keep putting off making any kind of decision about certifying/licensing specific brands of e-targets, they will only be rendering themselves even less necessary as a governing body for the sport. This will eventually all play out at the NRA level at whatever pace they decide on, and I rather suspect, not in a way that is completely to their liking.
I say that because it seems the NRA has pretty much painted themselves into a corner. By allowing the use of e-targets in F-Class matches on a temporary/trial basis in the first place, they have already set events in motion that have far outstripped their ability to deal them in a timely manner. Very lofty goals have been set with respect to the necessary accuracy/precision required for the e-target certification process. Apparently, many of the open-type e-targets will have difficulty meeting these accuracy/precision requirements, yet that type of e-targets has become commonplace all over the country (and elsewhere). Will the NRA now rule on certification/licensing in such a way as to make the e-target systems costing many thousands of dollars that are already in use by clubs all across the country non-compliant? Certainly, no decision made by the NRA at this point would surprise me, but if they made such a ruling, venues that had already purchased a system that now became non-compliant are not going to race out and buy a completely new system. They will simply keep using the system they have, whatever the ramifications with the NRA and reporting scores might be. Because of the rate at which e-target use has caught on, the NRA is now in a box because they failed to address the certification issue in a timely manner before e-target use became so widespread. IMO - now they pretty much have to live with the results. My advice for F-Class shooters using e-targets is to keep doing what you've been doing. Let the NRA worry about it. I certainly can sympathize with anyone that might shoot a National Record score that doesn't make it into the Record Books, but the same thing has always been true for shooters participating in "Approved" matches, where records don't count, so it's nothing new.
As a long time and well-documented adversary of e-targets in F-Class, I recently purchased one for myself and have started shooting in our local F-Class matches once again, which have been switched over to e-targets. I like the e-target setup very much for practice/training purposes; however, not so much for matches, where I personally think it makes the overall experience into something lesser than it was with traditional pulled targets. Nonetheless, e-targets are here to stay in F-Class, regardless of whatever the NRA does or doesn't do, because once a venue has installed them, you can either choose to participate or stay at home. Like it or not, that's the choice at most venues.
It seems as though what the NRA does about e-targets really doesn't matter much in a practical sense, except with regard to record-keeping. Nothing the NRA does will change the outcomes of events fired on e-targets. Further, if they choose to keep putting off making any kind of decision about certifying/licensing specific brands of e-targets, they will only be rendering themselves even less necessary as a governing body for the sport. This will eventually all play out at the NRA level at whatever pace they decide on, and I rather suspect, not in a way that is completely to their liking.
I say that because it seems the NRA has pretty much painted themselves into a corner. By allowing the use of e-targets in F-Class matches on a temporary/trial basis in the first place, they have already set events in motion that have far outstripped their ability to deal them in a timely manner. Very lofty goals have been set with respect to the necessary accuracy/precision required for the e-target certification process. Apparently, many of the open-type e-targets will have difficulty meeting these accuracy/precision requirements, yet that type of e-targets has become commonplace all over the country (and elsewhere). Will the NRA now rule on certification/licensing in such a way as to make the e-target systems costing many thousands of dollars that are already in use by clubs all across the country non-compliant? Certainly, no decision made by the NRA at this point would surprise me, but if they made such a ruling, venues that had already purchased a system that now became non-compliant are not going to race out and buy a completely new system. They will simply keep using the system they have, whatever the ramifications with the NRA and reporting scores might be. Because of the rate at which e-target use has caught on, the NRA is now in a box because they failed to address the certification issue in a timely manner before e-target use became so widespread. IMO - now they pretty much have to live with the results. My advice for F-Class shooters using e-targets is to keep doing what you've been doing. Let the NRA worry about it. I certainly can sympathize with anyone that might shoot a National Record score that doesn't make it into the Record Books, but the same thing has always been true for shooters participating in "Approved" matches, where records don't count, so it's nothing new.
National records are generally set in very favorable conditions which is also when open mic e-targets perform best so IMHO they should probably be valid. What’s not good is when the wind picks up and those liner 10’s turn into 9’s or the 9 is a 10 or it ghosted a shot or a missed shot or .,,,
XTR
F-TR obssessed shooting junkie
This is the game that is being played. There doesn't seem to be any "ambiguity". 4.1.2 is written is rather plain English.
Midsouth F-Class/ Mid-Range Prone
Registration Starts at 7:15 and Closes Promptly at 8:15. PLEASE BRING YOUR OWN ELECTRONIC DISPLAY THAT CAN RECEIVE WI-FI.midsouthfclass.com
"Use of Electronic Targets:
This match will utilize the ShotMarker target system. Due to NRA’s ambiguity regarding electronic targets, National Records may not be recognized."
What is problematic is that the rule requires that the NRA actually do something that to this date they have not, and therefore people who want to use E-Targets for other than club and approved matches can't do so within the current rule set.
Cancel Culture Bro! these etarget folks are offended by us pit duty pee on’s…hahahaha…actually my lazy a$$ likes them for practice and club matches, but not so much for a State or National event.
Medic505
Gold $$ Contributor
The answer to all this is simple. The NRA should keep two sets of records. The first set would be for legitimate records shot on pulled targets. The second set could be for e targets noted with an asterisk and a disclaimer "This record may or may not be legitimate , we really don't know".
flintcreek6412
Bob Petillo
I'm confused. If ET's are so horrible that they cause you to lose points.....then shouldn't a NR set on an ET actually be tougher than one on paper. I mean if ETs cause all of these false 9s and 8s yet I shoot a clean it sounds to me like that is a real accomplishment. 
One Eye Pete
Gold $$ Contributor
I used to live in the Northeastern US where the range I used had pits and targets could be pulled to be scored. I presently live in the Low Country of South Carolina. Down here installing pits isn't a viable option since the area is a big swamp and you would probably hit the water table before you got deep enough. Even if you didn't hit the water table the pits would probably be flooded most of the year. Trying to set up a system above grade would be cost prohibitive. Here E targets are the greatest thing since sliced bread since marking a target after each shot just isn't feasible. I guess If you wanted to shoot for a record you could put up a clean target center on the E target backer (positioned correctly) before you shot your string and use the E target results a guide but use the actual hits on the target center for "official" scoring. (gee I wonder what could possibly go wrong with that).
In retrospect I like Medic505's solution above. Just keep 2 sets of records. I believe E targets are here to stay and their accuracy will get better as the technology progresses.
In retrospect I like Medic505's solution above. Just keep 2 sets of records. I believe E targets are here to stay and their accuracy will get better as the technology progresses.
That is when they work best, but in fairness to all if adopted for records more info or manufacturer transparency on their sensitivity to the Doppler effect, what we are talking about, would be nice, that means an open frame and mic set up doesn’t know the difference between the wind changing speed or direction that sound had to travel through differently, from a shot landing away from prior/center: as the reason why one side’s mics now fired before the other, relative to before the wind change. As a result it’s going to split up a pair of shots that in reality hit on top of each other. (The manufacturers would have to agree that if the wind changed for every single shot, a perfectly called true one hole group would never be displayed as such, and also that a honey comb “group” as proven out on paper, but shot in sync with wind changes, could very well be reported as a one hole group, if that matters.)
This means that the shooter must as usual dope the wind, which information we all have equal access to, but, if we are being entirely honest, a shooter should also be able to dope the effect a wind shift has on the target’s operation, which we do not widely have access to, but is most certainly a real thing, whether it should be part of a game as traditional as bullseye shooting, or not. I don’t know whether it’s more analogous to learning programming errors hidden in a video game, or unfixable slack spots in steering linkage of a car before it’s raced, but it’s real and it’s unavoidable.
I’d like to see more information on this. Obviously it means that what changes happen wind-wise right at the target, are far more important on an open E-Target than on a paper target. People should be made aware of this and scope it specifically, too.
But by how much? Some of the bigger errors are ~7-10% as wide as full value, it appears on videos. How far out is it measuring the bullet; we know it’s doing so in multiple planes because it records entry angle which cannot be accomplished in one plane.
Should we expect the effect to net out as a compounding or diminishment of the “book” wind dope, relative to paper, and is that always the same whether a build, direction change or boil? Can or should the effect be waited out? Can vertical be affected? Does frame flex have a random or side-favored effect? These types of questions.
Last edited:
pat fulghum
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
I love my little 3 foot square e-target made out of 2x6 lumber. It weighs 50# and is close to ground. It doesn’t move.
But when you are at a match shooting a 6’ square target at 600 on minimal frames….and you you get I wide nine after hammering 15x’s.. it really can piss you off and make you scratch your head.
Where is shot 19 on paper in the attached pics.
I have rarely shot at a 6 target+ match where one target wasn’t acting up and you hear people say. “it will be ok”…. “It can work with 3 mics”… “take another one” … “ignore that ghost”. “those messages are ok, keep shooting”.. or things like that.
we need to know from the manufacture what messages, if any, are ok and what is a stop shooting and fix message.
just my opinion
But when you are at a match shooting a 6’ square target at 600 on minimal frames….and you you get I wide nine after hammering 15x’s.. it really can piss you off and make you scratch your head.
Where is shot 19 on paper in the attached pics.
I have rarely shot at a 6 target+ match where one target wasn’t acting up and you hear people say. “it will be ok”…. “It can work with 3 mics”… “take another one” … “ignore that ghost”. “those messages are ok, keep shooting”.. or things like that.
we need to know from the manufacture what messages, if any, are ok and what is a stop shooting and fix message.
just my opinion
Attachments
Last edited:
Retired Grunt
F Open Shooter
Will there ever be enough clubs switching to E Targets that will nullify the NRA Rule, if clubs are not shooting sanctioned matches and not paying the NRA will they wake up?
NRA keeps the records for sanctioned matches. They can do as they please. Etargets are here to stay. It is the target of choice for Fclasspointsseries. Many State and local matches. Maybe a Etargets association is next. And the Nationals for NRA. It seems a small minority really worried about Etargets results. They are very addicting. I guess the NRA could just write a .5 inch rule and end this rule debate. I shoot the same target as everyone at the match. But you won’t see me pulling targets summertime in the South.
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.