Visalia Unlim match likely new record

[BoydAllen]

Not to give too much away since I will be filing a full report that will be in the bulletin and on the IBS page but I had to tell this. In the third match this morning at 100 yards Gary Ocock shot a five shot .039. In the fourth match Jim Nicolas shot a .040, and in the fifth match he shot a .041. To put this in perspective, the current IBS record is .063. If Ocock's is officially measured as the smallest of the three, that will give him both the current NBRSA and IBS unlimited five shot 100 yd. single group records. There will be a lot more detail and lots of pictures in my match report.

 

[BoydAllen]

Yes it is. BTW Gary throws his charges with a powder measure

 

[Mulligan]

Not to give too much away since I will be filing a full report that will be in the bulletin and on the IBS page but I had to tell this. In the third match this morning at 100 yards Gary Ocock shot a five shot .039. In the fourth match Jim Nicolas shot a .040, and in the fifth match he shot a .041. To put this in perspective, the current IBS record is .063. If Ocock's is officially measured as the smallest of the three, that will give him both the current NBRSA and IBS unlimited five shot 100 yd. single group records. There will be a lot more detail and lots of pictures in my match report.

Thanks for the update Boyd

 

[ebb]

Mike in COL is sticking needles in his Boyd Allen and Gary Ocock dolls.

 

[LCazador]

Gary shoots his own bullets too! I saw the targets from a few weeks back that was pretty amazing stuff and to do it again, well that's even more amazing!

 

[Brians356]

And it wasn't wind-aided?
-

 

[expiper]

Yes it is. BTW Gary throws his charges with a powder measure

most real "B"enchrest shooters do,,,there is not time to fiddle with a scale or electronic device between targets,,,,OBTW,,,Congrats to Gary,,,he is a sesoned competitor and has shot among the best for as long as I can remember,,,(the 70's)I remember Gary coming to the Nationals in Fairchance Pa many years ago and just brought one rifle ( a Sporter) and shot it in unlimited ,,,at 200yds he shot a 10 shot group that mesaured .3xx",,,its no surprize he is doing so well with a rail gun,,,

Roger

 

[Brians356]

Virgil King, of the fabled Houston Warehouse, claimed powder charges within a whole grain or two were adequate. Now that's a wide accuracy node.
-

 

[expiper]

Virgil King, of the fabled Houston Warehouse, claimed powder charges within a whole grain or two were adequate. Now that's a wide accuracy node.
-

I agree,,,just look as some of the ladder testing that people do,,,,they will increas powder charge by .2-.3 grains per shot for several shots and you will see 6 or 8 at 600yds that you can cover with a snuff can !!!!,,,,

 

[BoydAllen]

Virgil King, of the fabled Houston Warehouse, claimed powder charges within a whole grain or two were adequate. Now that's a wide accuracy node.
-

IMO there is a lot of stuff in that article that does not hold up under close inspection. I don't know of anyone who claims that nodes are anywhere near that wide. Testing that sort of thing does not require a tunnel and is very easy to do. Many powders are relatively easy to throw +-.1 grain. 133 is not one of them. Also, the old T powder was not very sensitive to ambient conditions. 133 is. The first Chargemaster that I saw at a match was owned by Walt Berger. Many top shooters use one. Last weekend Steve was throwing the last of some '91 H322 that is relatively easy to throw. I am not sure what Gary was using, but often it is something other than 133.

 

[Brians356]

IMO there is a lot of stuff in that article that does not hold up under close inspection. I don't know of anyone who claims that nodes are anywhere near that wide.

Not hard to agree with that WRT the efficacy of certain aspects of his approach - when considered each in isolation. But I'm not prepared to blandly accept hearsay suggesting he never actually applied all the steps he described, or that the results his associates witnessed over a period of years were fictitious.
-

 

[BoydAllen]

Not hard to agree with that WRT the efficacy of certain aspects of his approach - when considered each in isolation. But I'm not prepared to blandly accept hearsay suggesting he never actually applied all the steps he described, or that the results his associates witnessed over a period of years were fictitious.
-

So, you saw what happened first hand....you personally observed what went on? I think that the whole thing is a lot of fun to read, but I have a better source for what works...match results and records. The nice thing about our hobbies is that as long as we can afford it and it hurts no one, we are free to pursue them in whatever manner pleases us. Be happy.

 

[Brians356]

So, you saw what happened first hand....you personally observed what went on?

Whoa! Of course not. Where could you have got that impression? More importantly, I don't see how that's relevant, unless I might have sworn the story as depicted is gospel true.

PS

A light dawns. I wasn't directing my comment about "heresay" toward you personally. Temporarily mixing up two threads, I had in mind the following comment (also referring to Virgil King, in a parallel thread "Sequence question") impugning the veracity of King et al:

The real secret is they claimed to be doing things that today's competitors would scoff at.

I regret any confusion I may have caused.
-

 

[BoydAllen]

No harm no foul. Have a good one.
Boyd