Comments from another website

We want to hear what your club is doing to bring in new members. Tell us what works, and give credit to those who are making the effort.

Moderator: Mod

Message
Author
bruce moulds
Posts: 2358
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 4:07 pm

#76 Postby bruce moulds » Thu Jan 24, 2013 11:09 am

thank you alan.
it is good to see maturity and an open mind at work.
that is what has got fclass to where it is today.
there are better options to keep our ranges afloat than prac/tac. it is just a matter of establishing these.
what might work in darwin might be different than port pirie,might be different than maffra.
the thing that is blatantly obvious is the number of people going through the tafe courses, most of whom do not want to shoot any discipline, but do want to shoot.
they are a resource waiting to be tapped.
another resource is the gunshops where beginners tool up. ftr is waiting in the wings to capitalize on this.
every area has a predominating interest.
i believe barcaldine identified roo shooters, and put on a shoot to cater for their equipment.
maffra might have rabbit or deer shooters.
there are probably more rimfire rifles out ther than all others put together, and they don't require reloading.
why the fixation with prac/tac?
keep safe,
bruce.
"SUCH IS LIFE" Edward Kelly 11 nov 1880
http://youtu.be/YRaRCCZjdTM

AlanF
Posts: 6791
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 8:22 pm
Location: Maffra, Vic

#77 Postby AlanF » Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:44 pm

bruce moulds wrote:...there are better options to keep our ranges afloat than prac/tac...

What exactly do you mean by prac/tac? I personally think that tactical rifles shooting down the range are not a problem if their specs are within range safety rules.

Alan

bruce moulds
Posts: 2358
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 4:07 pm

#78 Postby bruce moulds » Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:54 pm

alan,
when i used to shoot ipsc pistol, it was referred to in the public as practical pistol..
it was known in the movement that this name was used to appease the public.
within our circle it was thought of more as combat shooting.
i have heard the term tac rifles of late, and doing practical shooting with them.
when tactical guys are together the word tac and tactical tend to be used, whereas in public, practical tends to get used.
i use a hybridization of both to avoid confusion. hence prac/tac or tac/prac.
incidentally, the ipsc guys thought it was a bit of a joke that the public fell for that one.
keep safe,
bruce.
"SUCH IS LIFE" Edward Kelly 11 nov 1880

http://youtu.be/YRaRCCZjdTM

OuttaAmmo
Posts: 201
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:52 am
Location: Darwin

#79 Postby OuttaAmmo » Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:04 pm

why the fixation with prac/tac?
keep safe,
bruce.


As the name implies, the rifles are a lot more PRACTICAL,
Especially if you hunt and varmint shoot as well, or shoot in other disciplines.

Brad Y
Posts: 2006
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:21 pm

#80 Postby Brad Y » Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:35 pm

I havent posted much for a reason- Ive been busy trying to develop a few things at my club that can be a foundation for bettering the F Class disciplines both at my club and in WA. Plenty of work left to do as well.

The feedback from quite a few guys was that they wanted to shoot practical/tactical style. This isnt just arriving at the firing mound and shooting 2 sighters plus 10 scoring shots. They want car bodies to shoot out of, rooftops, bunkers etc. More of a "sniper" style thing where they can range a target and make a single shot or engage multiple targets. This is the sort of thing that needs to be a separate discipline. It isnt F class, it isnt target rifle and yes I believe that anti gun lobbyists would claim that it does associate with the killing of humans. The NRAA in my opinion shouldnt get involved in it. We have service and field rifle disciplines that people are welcome to attend. Our club runs both of these and if someone wants to shoot a tac/prac gun laying down then its fine. Its more for fun, having a shot and enjoying a social day at the range. But Im against civilian sniper style shooting if it were ever raised as an addition to F class shooting.

Should that person with their tac rifle wish to participate in F class, then I would encourage them to bring thier tac rifle (up to 8mm) and they can shoot off a bipod and rear bag to their content. Of course they must single load and obey all the SSR's. Dont have a problem with this and personally encourage anyone who wants to use thier tactical rifle to come along and have a go. To me, its F/TR if they use 223 or 308 or FO if they use another cal. We cant put pressure on them to have more traditional looking and functioning rifles if they comply with SSR's. Im guessing here, but back when TR was king and F Class was a new thing there would have been more than a few comments made about the rifles and how they shouldnt be allowed. This is evolution and the way things are going. Its not my thing having different chassis systems and making a bolt action rifle look like a super wizz bang sniper tactical elite firing system, but until they are illegal by law, and/or dont comply with SSR's then we are mad to knock back the extra shooters. These are the people that take note of rifles that shoot better at long range and will more than likely build a more conventional f class rifle at a later stage. Im not sure we need another class for it and people wanting to use varmint rifles- maybe we do maybe we dont, thats another subject.

At the end of the day if they go home with a smile and turn up at the next shoot willing to have another go, then thats what will get the sport a better profile and will increase our membership and prize shoot numbers.

Lastly one thing that was pointed out that I havent posted was that we (NRAA members) are more willing to argue with each other and try to stop letting someone with a funny looking gun shoot before we think about the privilege it is to be able to shoot at all.

MCLE
Posts: 279
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 10:08 am
Location: Melbourne

#81 Postby MCLE » Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:45 pm

I think that we are worrying a lot about Tac type ( What ever they are)rifles a verry loose term so would that be black ones or ones with rear mono pods or ten shot mags or spots to place accessors or rifles with range finding reticles or a 24" barrel and so on.I am in this section of shooters and have been to comps where if we start weeding them out we won't have a crop.And as for worrying about where we are going by letting them in we should ask where are we going by turning them away.

IanP
Posts: 1193
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 11:30 am
Location: Adelaide

#82 Postby IanP » Thu Jan 24, 2013 8:44 pm

Here is a current Australian Ad for Nightforce scopes. Bruce had one of these and used it for many years. It seems a lot of FO, FS and F T/R competitors use tactical equipment.

http://www.nvt.com.au/c/171_357_396/nig ... copes.html

Its all just equipment, who cares what media hype the ad companies spin on these products in their attempt to reach their perceived market. I really think that just as F-Class competitors know its all just equipment and we use what best suits our needs, so does the public.

F-Class is a long range shooting sport which uses rifles which could also be used for sniping in the military or for police work. Thats the facts of the matter as far as the equipment is concerned. The thing is though, that the competition is an international discipline that is shot in Europe, Africa and the Americas. We chose to shoot it as well in Australia and also have a domestic variant in FS.

I will use whatever equipment is allowed in the rules to compete fairly with my fellow shooters and I dont care if the equipment is black, blue or primrose too! If a vocal individual wants to rally against the equipment we use in our competitions let him start a campaign to change it and lets see how far he gets!

We all have the right to voice our opinion but when it becomes an obsession, its time for the person concerned to do something real about changing it to what they perceive to be the best outcome for the sport. Thats the democratic thing to do, put a motion to the F-Class shooters of Australia and let them vote on it. It will take some doing to get it to that point but its effort which has the possibility of a result. Constantly repeating the same thing over and over again on this forum wont achieve a thing.

Lets do something to unify our shooting membership instead of pushing it into separate classes and causing division. Alan Fraser voiced his opinion and asked us all what we think would increase our membership and make us more inclusive. I think many good ideas have been raised and a much needed discussion has been started. Getting those shooters using "tactical" equipment into shooting their rifles in F-Class events I consider a good thing and encourage them to bring their friends along to try it as well.

Ian

DannyS
Posts: 921
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 10:33 pm
Location: Hamilton
Contact:

#83 Postby DannyS » Thu Jan 24, 2013 9:45 pm

Brad, I think you have nailed it. Very good post.

Cheers
Danny

Quick
Posts: 918
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2008 9:09 pm
Location: Yanchep, Western Australia
Contact:

#84 Postby Quick » Thu Jan 24, 2013 10:04 pm

I agree with Ian and Brad aswell, even though I would love to shoot Prac, Its not F-Class. When pure accuracy at distance is on my mind, Its F-Class.

I think one of our best bets is to introduce F/TR as an approved class and see how it goes. It would cater for guys who have Prac style rifles and want to shoot F-Class, hunters who want to see how their rifles perform and factory rifles. Unfortunatly, a 155gr is hard to get fast enough is a shorter barrel ( I know, Ive been trying my damnest to find a good load for my 26" barrel, any advice, please PM me!!!) yes I know we can shoot Open (as I do with my 308) Its to hard to go up against the 6.5mm and 7mm shooters and be competetive in our class. having F/TR would keep a level playing field and open up the playing field to alot more shooters with rifles that arnt set up specificly for F-Class.

And before people say FS is level because we have restricted projectiles, thats great, if you run 28-30" tubes. otherwise you need a better BC/heavier bullet to make up that short barrel length with BC. My 175gr SMK goes at around 2690 - 2700fps and that has close to same wind drift at 1000yds as a 155gr at 2950 (heck, 155gr beats is by a few clicks IIRC!!!!) But I dont have to punish my brass and rifle to do it llike I do with 155gr as I'm nearly always close to max loads and using 3-4gr more powder. Thats level AFAIK.
Shaun aka 'Quick'
Yanchep, Western Australia

308 Win F/TR & F-S
7mm F-Open Shooter.

DannyS
Posts: 921
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 10:33 pm
Location: Hamilton
Contact:

#85 Postby DannyS » Thu Jan 24, 2013 10:12 pm

Ian, I can see that you and Bruce, are both looking at things from different prospectives.

Just because, you don't agree with Bruce, does not mean Bruce is wrong. And neither, does it mean you are wrong.

Surely, there can be a happy medium.

I think Brad made some very good comments.

Cheers
Danny

AlanF
Posts: 6791
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 8:22 pm
Location: Maffra, Vic

#86 Postby AlanF » Thu Jan 24, 2013 10:19 pm

I think Bruce should be encouraging the tactical rifles and camo clothes to be pimped with bright colours, so that the public likes them. We could then refer to it as "Pimped Tac".

Sorry, its getting late.....

Brad Y
Posts: 2006
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:21 pm

#87 Postby Brad Y » Thu Jan 24, 2013 11:08 pm

Alan did you get a big wooden spoon for xmas? :lol:

Dave P
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 12:10 am
Location: Hervey Bay Qld

#88 Postby Dave P » Thu Jan 24, 2013 11:13 pm

I have followed this debate with interest and excluding one post when bruce depressed me I have remained quiet.
I see things a little differently sometimes than most and here are a few observations ...
Tactical rifles are not evil anymore than any rifle is. The perception bruce alludes too is moot when you consider that those arrayed against guns are non discriminatry they are against all guns regardless of shape or colour and will not stop till they have banned everything.
To suggest that excluding a type of rifle will in someway make another rifle legal for longer seems flawed just by typing it given the hatred and determination of anti gun groups as alluded to above.
Bruce if we are to make our rifles look less threatening and linked to killing so as to last the longest before the end shouldnt we start using Benchrest rail guns. Its pretty easy to show that a 50 plus pound contraption that fires single shots and takes ten minutes to set up and aim is not a big threat of mass killings ??
As to growing the sport and including tactical rifle owners ... note I said INCLUDING tactical rifle owners. There is no need for the NRAA to sudeenly start shooting sniper type matches as has been mentioned. Neither is there a need to make tactical rifles shoot in current classes which obviously dont interest enough new shooters.
Simply allow tactical rifles there own class call it F Open Tactical or Pratical or Flower patch if that sounds less threatening. Let them shoot a match using current targets, prone (kneeling and sitting can be options) let them use magazines (as long as the magazine is not fitted to the rifle before the commence fire whats the issue ie magazine off, bolt out seems pretty safe to me)
If it will conflict with some members let them shoot in the morning or on Sunday. They can have range officers etc from amongst there own via the same process and approvals as we use now if it takes hold. No need for metal targets its about shooting to timings accurately over longer ranges.
If there is enough interested they will soon be running themselves.
By nature we shooters are curious and some of these will come try F Class, hell an inter club challenge F Class v Tactical Flower Class will encourage cross pollination.
If however these tactical folks really are not interested they just wont show in any numbers. At worse you host a shoot or two (promoted locally) and you get poor turn up you have a few propesctive F Classers on your hands. At best it becomes a stepping stone to target shooting and NRAA growth.
You dont need to re invent the wheel to test the waters and it can be done on a club level

macguru
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 9:49 am

#89 Postby macguru » Fri Jan 25, 2013 5:42 am

The current format is just fine... F standard with scoped fullbore rifles and F open with more exotic calibers..... There is plenty of opportunity in F standard for tac 308s to have a go and a few of them may actually do fairly well. When they rebarrel they could end up with a fine target rifle, perhaps, and get into handloading etc. I think introducing more formats would dilute the current attendance..

Quick
Posts: 918
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2008 9:09 pm
Location: Yanchep, Western Australia
Contact:

#90 Postby Quick » Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:59 am

Mac,

Problem is that its harder to get 155gr upto speed in a short barrel which many factory and prac style rifles have. So they use 175gr SMK, etc which dont need that MV to stay accurate at longer ranges due to a higher BC. Thats the problem for many with those rifles. And for us here in WA, F-Open is nearly non-exsistant so there is taht issue aswell. Im the only Open shooter at my club and around half the club is FS guys.

F/TR would cover that issue and also many guys wouldnt mind single loading anyway.
Shaun aka 'Quick'
Yanchep, Western Australia

308 Win F/TR & F-S
7mm F-Open Shooter.


Return to “Helping F-Class to Grow”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest