F-class is an advanced discipline. $ stops new shooters

[daj]

Tony I sympathise. I have bad tinnitus myself.

But before we ban brakes outright here is a little more info on the subject. http://precisionrifleblog.com/2015/08/2 ... t-results/

I have used quite a few different brakes. Some produce horrendous sound levels and some are quite good. The design of the brake, cartridge and barrel length all determine the peak sound levels.

For example, .338Laps and 300WMs etc are loud (deafening) no matter what. However, I regularly shoot a braked 260 less than 1m from shooters either side of me and they say they hardly notice it. In fact, before firing my first shot I ask nearby shooters to let me know if the brake is a problem for them and I will move elsewhere. I have never had to move.

No doubt the magnums are a problem for some. A well designed brake on a 260, 308, 6mm etc need not be an issue.

[DenisA]

The trouble is that with a club class as we're discussing, it would be pointless putting a rule in saying you can use one type of brake but not another. Its getting too complicated and people simply wouldn't bother going.

It has to be any brake or no brakes.

What if hypothetically brakes were allowed on target 1 for example and a dividing board made of steal stakes and ply was set up between 1 and 2. An R.O standing could still see over the top easily.

Gee, wouldn't legalising suppressors solve a lot of issues for everyone ................ that's another topic though.

[AlanF]

To be fair about brakes, its mainly about what you're accustomed to. In full bore we've always had the luxury of no brakes, and its understandable we'd prefer not to have them. Their main purpose is to give rifles a better "power to weight" ratio, something that is important to hunters, but not to target shooters, in fact I've never understood why some BR classes think they need them. But if we want to attract shooters with hunting (and tactical) rifles, we need to figure out a way to include them. Its not hard to accommodate them at club shoots either using sound barriers or segregation, but more difficult at competitions. The obvious answer is to stipulate better hearing protection for everyone - when you think about it not a huge impost, and probably overdue anyway. If this had been done more effectively in the past, we wouldn't have the high levels of hearing damage to most of our older members.

[Jase PTRC]

I shoot regularly with blokes that all have muzzle brakes, with hearing protection on id happily lay prone on a mound all day and have done on many occasions with brakes either side calibres ranging from 223 up to 338 lapua. I dont know where this stigma against muzzle brakes comes from. if your on the mound you should have ear protection on and if you off the mound they should not affect you.

[daj]

[AlanF]

I think we should be prepared to work with the muzzle brake exponents if it means a significant rise in memberships. After all, when F-Class came about, the TR people had to put up with things like scope zero holdups and shot out target centres, not to mention those F-Classers who thought it was fair to compare scores with TR. So hopefully we can show the same general level of tolerance that TR did (and before you say something, note that I said "general" ).

[DenisA]

At this stage I have something that I can put to my club members and inturn the committee........ almost.

What's the next step regarding muzzle brakes? I guess it needs to be run past the committee first (with the proposal) and if they agree to look into it then we go further?

Hypothetically, if that was agreed on, who's the first person or entity to contact?

[johnk]

[DenisA]

[AlanF]

Denis,

In our case it involved an addition to the range standing orders. That required Police approval but muzzle brakes are of no concern to them. The big one is to get it into the SSRs. At Rosedale we can't yet allow muzzle brakes in any competition, even club competitions. That didn't concern us too much for what we are currently doing for hunting rifles, which is zero and testing sessions, but if they want to have a competition, even between themselves, then it must be done according to either F-Class or Field Class rules, neither of which allow brakes. I'd suggest that the best way of doing it is to write muzzle brakes into the equipment rules for the proposed new class. This will require a national approach of course, but unlike things like muzzle energy limits, the police won't be the stumbling block. It may however be the conservative side of our own membership. They have to be convinced that the benefits of increased membership will outweigh their concerns about muzzle brakes. It won't be easy, but I'd suggest some sort of trial at a leading club could be used to demonstrate methods of making them more acceptable e.g. with superior ear protection.

John,

I wasn't around at the time F-Class was in its infancy prior to inclusion in the SSRs, but isn't that what's happening now? A class for hunting/tactical rifles has been talked about for several years now, and a number of ranges are catering for them in various ways. If the S&T Associations are prepared to admit that F-Class is not growing fast enough to save us, then they must be nearly ready to accept that a new more widely appealing class may be the answer.

Alan

[johnk]

just for information, some general ICFRA rules:

F2.11. Magazine: In countries where magazines are legal, a magazine - if fitted - will not be used except as a loading platform for single rounds.
F2.12. Muzzle compensators or muzzle brakes are not permitted.
F2.13. Sound moderators are not permitted.

[daj]

Competition rules aside, this could be a work-around for clubs that have brake bans in place. A sound moderator that is easy to make, cheap and legal.
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/201 ... -scotland/

[johnk]

[daj]

I like the way you think John.

[johnk]

By the way, 1000 yard bench is the only one of our disciplines that is permitted to use brakes by the rules. All others expressly prohibit it:

22.2.2 Light Gun
(a) Light Gun rifles have a maximum weight of 7.71 kilograms (17 pounds) and are fired from sandbag rests front and rear. There are no restrictions on the shape or width of the stock or the barrel contour. Muzzle brakes are allowed in the Light Gun subject to any range restrictions and/or the Rules of the Host Club. Muzzle brakes that exhaust to the rear or are of a clamshell design are not allowed.