A-MAx

[Ned]

Krakey

The 6mm BR is as good if not better than a .308 at 1000 yds, the problem is the old timers don’t like progress in our sport or the competition. the only reason we shoot .223 is because back in the dark ages it was a military round. And the state associations and the NRAA want to control the ammo we use because they make lots of money off you. but look around on the web, there are more dealers in the states now shipping projectiles to Australia and even with postage it is cheaper than what we pay from the NRAA. THEY ARE RIPPING OFF THE SHOOTERS IN AUSTRALIA. I would like to see an audit done on the NRAA on just how much money they are making on projectiles, there policy is to make 1cent per projectile from the figures I have seen between the states and here there is a huge difference, and the NRAA are supposed to be a none profit organization. I have also been told that the NRAA order there projectiles direct from Sierra and have a special buy price that they should be passing on to the state association and the invoice goes to Highland sports then the NRAA pays that invoice to highland sports, so the NRAA can tell people that they buy there projectiles through Highland sports.

Ned

[saum2]

Ned, I agree with all of your comments.
The problem with the .223 (5.56) is that the projectiles available & supplied by the NRAA are not consistant, namely A-max. I know a couple of top full time .223 shoters who are still having issues with A-max. I don't think the 308 projectiles as supplied have any issues except for the Sierras pricing.

[TOM]

If you get to replace your 223 with 6BR, I wanna replace my .308 with a 7mm, hang on a minute, it sounds a touch like F Open...

As for the A-MAX, how on earth can you stick a piece of plastic to the end of a bullet and maintain concentricity?? I think your pushing shit up hill if you think they would be accurate as so many have already found out, yet you persist, wasting time, money and effort to gain no value.

[johnk]

Enough of the inclusiveness & apologies!

F Standard means F Class for the standard TR calibers & projectiles.

If you don't agree, shoot F Open or elsewhere.

[Peter Marum]

johnk

thank you

[saum2]

Thanks Tom for your accurate assessment of the .223 80gn A-max. You're right, and so is John k, a lot more shooters will turn to F-Open due to frustration of available quality projectiles in standard shooting.
Everyone in TR & F-standard should be grateful that we have the Dyer projectile in 308 at a price for the everyday shooter. over & out.

cheers

[Ned]

JohnK & Peter the Bus driver.

No I don’t agree. If you want to make it a level playing field let the .223 shooters chose there own projectiles, and the answer to that question is the greed of the NRAA.

Ned

[John E]

Let's make it a level playing field by making it 308 only. Ned can take his 223 and shoot whatever projectiles in F Open. Problem solved.

John

[johnk]

Ned,

You're looking at only one aspect of what you call a level playing field. Let's consider the others:

Recoil. I demand that the allowable weight of .223s be decreased until the felt recoil is the same as a .308 My understanding is that you overall weight allowed would need to be reduced to around 2.75 kg, or perhaps a little less.

Cost. You use less expensive projectiles & less weight of powder. .223 shooters should be charged a monetary penalty for each round that they shoot & the money collected be given to users of the .308 as compensation.

I believe that the reduced size of cleaning patches is compensated for by the need for far more cleaning required with the .223, or so I'm told.

Seriously, Ned, as has been said before, you were never offered a level playing field, only optional calibres with a different mix of benefits & tradeoffs. Level just ain't possible & what you want is the benefits of the .223 without paying for the tradeoffs.

John

[IanP]

F T/R use the following rule on ammo, nice and simple and plenty of choice. Sooner or later we will follow their lead, its just a matter of time!

F2.3. An F/TR Class rifle is limited to .223 Remington or .308 Winchester calibre chambers or
their commercial metrification equivalents. Chamber dimensions must conform to SAAMI
or CIP dimensions. Ammunition may be commercially made or hand-loaded as defined in
Rule F2.24. There is no restriction on bullet weight

Ned, for you and me both, the sooner the better.

IanP[/b]

[John E]

Shoot F/TR -- problem solved. I wasn't aware that you shoot FSTD anyway, Ian.

John

[macguru]

I think people are starting to shoot whatever projectile they want in 308 and 223. The next logical step would be to allow 6br in f standard.

I would draw the line at 6xc, 6x47 and 6.5 mm or 300 win mag. The can shoot some pretty amazing projectiles..........

[Ned]

Macguru

I think you are right on track. I too believe it is time we choose our own projectiles for F/Std as long as they are 80.0gn for .223 and 155.0gn for .308.

JohnE

If I went and shot F/Open you would miss me.

JohnK

I give .308 shooters enough leeway with out having to pay there entry fees to PM

Ned

[Guest]

Do that and then they will want something different/better. It will be a never ending cycle to the detriment of the category. I dont see an issue here, there is a class for the .308 and .223 using restricted bullets, there is also a class that will allow you to use whatever you like, Correct me if I am wrong.

[M12LRPV]

Do that and then they will want something different/better. It will be a never ending cycle to the detriment of the category. I dont see an issue here, there is a class for the .308 and .223 using restricted bullets, there is also a class that will allow you to use whatever you like, Correct me if I am wrong.

You are not wrong. No correction needed.