Building a suitable rifle for SH

[BATattack]

That's a fine list Bat, but again there are a few not traditional hunting rifles in there.
My concern is that whilst on paper they could, why has no one done it?
I can scrub the tikka CTR off that list, its only got 20" and it definately can't, I've tried. Also scrub the Sako vatmint (the 85 in 243 at least) I've tried that too. I've not tried the T3 in 223 but would say not there too.
My concern is that we encourage people with guns that simply aren't designed for this game to have a good old Aussie go and end up with lots of missis ( jepordising our ranges) or someone has a right proper go and blows their face off.

I agree that some of them aren't traditional hunting rifles and that in an ideal world it would be restricted to traditional hunting rifles only but there are a few problems with it. If we make it traditional hunting rifles only. What is the template for a traditional hunting rifle and who asses it? Metallic silhouette has a template box that rifles must fit into along with barrel diameters. As others have said these tac / chassis style of rifles are becoming much more common and if we excluded them the small pool would become even smaller. Also as you mention many traditional hunting rifles are marginal for the longer ranges. I feel the a above is the line where SPORTING/hunting rifles become suitable for long range shooting

The reason you don't see people doing it is because they aren't going to be competitive with the custom rifles we use. Great way to win a debate by throwing in safety but I don't really see how it's significantly different to what you would do with any new shooter. Most clubs take new shooters with new rifles and asses them at shorter ranges first. How often do you shoot 1000 at your club? I reckon we shoot it about 3x a year so even if they can't
reach 1000 they get to do plenty of other shooting during the year. Reloading safety is no different to anything else we do. Refer them to a reloading manual. We all have a duty of care. At least the manual is actually applicable to factory chamber dimensions.

They make a CTR with a 24" barrel. https://www.qldgunexchange.com/products ... ctr-24inch Note 243 isn't in my list of Cal's because it doesn't have the twist. Hey Cheech. . . . How does Reece go with his tikka 223, how did old mate go with his sako 300wm hunter, 3-9 Leupold and 190gr Sierra? Remember our sport, targets and ranges were mostly founded on 303s. Omarks originally had 25" barrels running projectiles with less BC than currently available and at factory velocity.

Get out and buy yourself a Howa varmint with a HS precision stock in 6.5 creed and give it a go. I think you'll be surprised. My push for FACTORY rifle is based on price but also based on that they do have a limit to how accurate they will be. There would be minimal gains, neck turning, bullet pointing, loading to 1 kernal, weight sorting brass etc etc etc so all that complicated stuff can be take off a new shooters "must have / do" list

Your solution seems to be you can only be competitive with us if you have more than X expendable income and are willing to wait 6-12 months for a gunsmith to build you a custom rifle?

[BATattack]

We can't agree on the rules so moving it to another thread isn't going to change anything.

The intention of S/H is to encourage new members. Its written in the rules as such. Refer 23.2. Therefore us current members shouldn't be the ones adjusting the rules to suit ourselves. This is something that the NRAA should be reviewing and and setting up the rules based on how best to grow our numbers. Like a business with a clear vision on how to attract new customers. If it can accommodate existing members to have some extra fun then that's a bonus.

[cheech]

Yes there are factory guns in our club that get it done , I always advise “Tikka” all day long

That's a fine list Bat, but again there are a few not traditional hunting rifles in there.
My concern is that whilst on paper they could, why has no one done it?
I can scrub the tikka CTR off that list, its only got 20" and it definately can't, I've tried. Also scrub the Sako vatmint (the 85 in 243 at least) I've tried that too. I've not tried the T3 in 223 but would say not there too.
My concern is that we encourage people with guns that simply aren't designed for this game to have a good old Aussie go and end up with lots of missis ( jepordising our ranges) or someone has a right proper go and blows their face off.

I agree that some of them aren't traditional hunting rifles and that in an ideal world it would be restricted to traditional hunting rifles only but there are a few problems with it. If we make it traditional hunting rifles only. What is the template for a traditional hunting rifle and who asses it? Metallic silhouette has a template box that rifles must fit into along with barrel diameters. As others have said these tac / chassis style of rifles are becoming much more common and if we excluded them the small pool would become even smaller. Also as you mention many traditional hunting rifles are marginal for the longer ranges. I feel the a above is the line where SPORTING/hunting rifles become suitable for long range shooting

The reason you don't see people doing it is because they aren't going to be competitive with the custom rifles we use. Great way to win a debate by throwing in safety but I don't really see how it's significantly different to what you would do with any new shooter. Most clubs take new shooters with new rifles and asses them at shorter ranges first. How often do you shoot 1000 at your club? I reckon we shoot it about 3x a year so even if they can't
reach 1000 they get to do plenty of other shooting during the year. Reloading safety is no different to anything else we do. Refer them to a reloading manual. We all have a duty of care. At least the manual is actually applicable to factory chamber dimensions.

They make a CTR with a 24" barrel. https://www.qldgunexchange.com/products ... ctr-24inch Note 243 isn't in my list of Cal's because it doesn't have the twist. Hey Cheech. . . . How does Reece go with his tikka 223, how did old mate go with his sako 300wm hunter, 3-9 Leupold and 190gr Sierra? Remember our sport, targets and ranges were mostly founded on 303s. Omarks originally had 25" barrels running projectiles with less BC than currently available and at factory velocity.

Get out and buy yourself a Howa varmint with a HS precision stock in 6.5 creed and give it a go. I think you'll be surprised. My push for FACTORY rifle is based on price but also based on that they do have a limit to how accurate they will be. There would be minimal gains, neck turning, bullet pointing, loading to 1 kernal, weight sorting brass etc etc etc so all that complicated stuff can be take off a new shooters "must have / do" list

Your solution seems to be you can only be competitive with us if you have more than X expendable income and are willing to wait 6-12 months for a gunsmith to build you a custom rifle?

[Tim L]

I agree that some of them aren't traditional hunting rifles and that in an ideal world it would be restricted to traditional hunting rifles only but there are a few problems with it. If we make it traditional hunting rifles only. What is the template for a traditional hunting rifle and who asses it?

That is exactly the question we are trying to find an answer to.

Metallic silhouette has a template box that rifles must fit into along with barrel diameters. As others have said these tac / chassis style of rifles are becoming much more common and if we excluded them the small pool would become even smaller. Also as you mention many traditional hunting rifles are marginal for the longer ranges. I feel the a above is the line where SPORTING/hunting rifles become suitable for long range shooting

We want to keep exclusions to a minimum, the question is how to define what is what.

The reason you don't see people doing it is because they aren't going to be competitive with the custom rifles we use.

I disagree. Having tried, and seen others try, some rifles simply can't do it. I'm not saying exclude them, but we do need to manage them.

Great way to win a debate by throwing in safety but I don't really see how it's significantly different to what you would do with any new shooter. Most clubs take new shooters with new rifles and asses them at shorter ranges first.

NOT considering safety is assclownery of the highest order. You will be aware that our range authorisation is granted on the provision that all bullets land in the bullet catcher. That is determined by the bullet going through the target. Missis on NRAA ranges are an issue. All I'm saying is that we could formalise the way these rifles are introduced to the range. Do we need to? Maybe not, let's discuss it. We do, for the most part, already do this, but we still get, even experienced shooters with proven FClass gear, turn up with no zero and fire from 8,900 yards! So we don't do it all the time do we!

Reloading safety is no different to anything else we do. Refer them to a reloading manual. We all have a duty of care. At least the manual is actually applicable to factory chamber dimensions.

Not so long ago you pointed out yourself that some of these new shooters have no idea about reloading. You only need a quick visit to any shooting forum to confirm this. Do YOUR loads conform to book? Don't answer that. So,- Let's say JB is having a problem and asks what load JC is using then goes and does it. "Doesn't happen" you may say. It does mate, I've done it. I asked what someone was using. (Both Barnard 308s) and loaded mine up. What I didn't realise is they were using Palma brass and I wasn't. Shot from safe into their load with no problems (no flat primers, no cratering no extraction issues) only to find I'd actually blown every primer pocket on the upper end of the ladder. The 1,25 inch barrel and barnard action offset the effects. Can the same be said of a sporting action?

They make a CTR with a 24" barrel. https://www.qldgunexchange.com/products ... ctr-24inch Note 243 isn't in my list of Cal's because it doesn't have the twist.

I stand corrected, Not sure how a 24" barrel is a "Compact" tac rifle (CTR) but it highlights the problem of definitions.

Hey Cheech. . . . How does Reece go with his tikka 223, how did old mate go with his sako 300wm hunter, 3-9 Leupold and 190gr Sierra? Remember our sport, targets and ranges were mostly founded on 303s. Omarks originally had 25" barrels running projectiles with less BC than currently available and at factory velocity.

If they are "traditional hunting rifles they may prove that it's possible, it would be interesting to know. I'm not sure what the 303 comment is about. They can be superbly accurate rifles.

Get out and buy yourself a Howa varmint with a HS precision stock in 6.5 creed and give it a go.

My point is that THAT is NOT a "traditional hunting rifle". It had been designed by the manufacturer to shoot further. You are actually agreeing with me, apparently without wanting to.

My push for FACTORY rifle is based on price but also based on that they do have a limit to how accurate they will be.

I'm fine with that, but if we just say "factory rifle" based on upper price, we include rifles that "potentially" can't do the job and inherit the safety concerns mentioned. We either exclude them (not desirable) or MUST (duty of care) mitigate the risk. That's all I'm saying. We cant just ignore it and leave it to some insubstantial belief that it will be managed at range level. Rules also alleviate the need for an RO to have (potentially heated) discussions over the issue.

Your solution seems to be you can only be competitive with us if you have more than X expendable income and are willing to wait 6-12 months for a gunsmith to build you a custom rifle?

Not at all. I DO want to see these shooters on our ranges. As many as possible. What WE need to do is define who/what competes against who/what.
and that is not bloody easy and is exactly why the OP posted the thread we are commenting on.

We can't agree on the rules so moving it to another thread isn't going to change anything.

That's just a cop out. and this thread is just a discussion that raised the questions that need to be answered in order to write the rules. You have offered valuable insight and valid points. What the new thread aims to do is validate the issues and try and work them into written rules that limit interpretation. That, contrary to popular belief, is not an easy task, in fact it's very bloody hard.

The intention of S/H is to encourage new members. Its written in the rules as such. Refer 23.2.

That WAS the intention when those rules were written. Haven't these recent threads highlighted to you that people WANT to move on. They WANT to make this a competitive discipline? Are we not in a position where it HAS encouraged new members? Who now find themselves floundering with the original broad definition rules.

Therefore us current members shouldn't be the ones adjusting the rules to suit ourselves. This is something that the NRAA should be reviewing and and setting up the rules based on how best to grow our numbers. Like a business with a clear vision on how to attract new customers. If it can accommodate existing members to have some extra fun then that's a bonus.

Really! Someone else's job!

Who, in the NRAA is going to write these rules? It's easy to just call them "the NRAA" but I know you know it's actually Matt, Wayne, John, Tina, Bruce et al. Just shooters who have agreed to give up their time to steer our sport. Do you want a committees full of TR and Fclass shooters to write these rules? Or would you prefer they consult the stakeholders, US! (Well not me particularly, I'll be sticking with FTR but I'd very much like SH to flourish and if I can help make that happen,,,, well why not?

[Tim L]

Yes there are factory guns in our club that get it done , I always advise “Tikka” all day long

What guns Cheech, what model.
A huge part of the problem is that "factory gun" does not have a definable characteristic. It is open to interpretation that is soooo broad as to mean absolutely nothing.

[BATattack]

Yes there are factory guns in our club that get it done , I always advise “Tikka” all day long

What guns Cheech, what model.
A huge part of the problem is that "factory gun" does not have a definable characteristic. It is open to interpretation that is soooo broad as to mean absolutely nothing.

I'd say a factory gun is one that is built in a factory? . . . . One that you can show was produced and available through advertisement in their website etc

There are more exotic "factory" rifles such as AI, HS precision ( Genuine HS not a gun with a HS stock since we seem to need to be specific at the moment) Christensen arms etc etc etc that are very high quality but produced in small numbers. This is where the price cap comes in to play and removes these semi custom "factory" rifles from the playing field and bumps them into the class they should be in.

This is already being done in PRS so I'm not sure why you see it as being unachievable. Wouldn't it be logical if possible to set up our rules in parallel to the growing PRS movement so people could enjoy both PRS and F class with the same rifle? Say what you will about PRS but they are doing something better than us to grow numbers.

[Tim L]

Yes there are factory guns in our club that get it done , I always advise “Tikka” all day long

What guns Cheech, what model.
A huge part of the problem is that "factory gun" does not have a definable characteristic. It is open to interpretation that is soooo broad as to mean absolutely nothing.

I'd say a factory gun is one that is built in a factory? . . . . One that you can show was produced and available through advertisement in their website etc

There are more exotic "factory" rifles such as AI, HS precision ( Genuine HS not a gun with a HS stock since we seem to need to be specific at the moment) Christensen arms etc etc etc that are very high quality but produced in small numbers. This is where the price cap comes in to play and removes these semi custom "factory" rifles from the playing field and bumps them into the class they should be in.

This is already being done in PRS so I'm not sure why you see it as being unachievable. Wouldn't it be logical if possible to set up our rules in parallel to the growing PRS movement so people could enjoy both PRS and F class with the same rifle? Say what you will about PRS but they are doing something better than us to grow numbers.

I think that's a fantastic Idea, I'll find the rules.

[BATattack]

My basic template for rules would be based around the below

######################

Main aim for S/H is to encourage membership growth by providing and accessible, cost effective, fair and competitive class.

This would be divided into 2 sub classes.

S/H Factory.
- Rifles must be factory produced.
- Rifles must be of bolt action repeater type
- Rifle must be of 8mm or less
- Rifles with all attachments must weigh less than 7kg
- At the ROs request competitors must provide documentation that the rifle is factory produced in the form of brochure, factory website, factory advertisement. (Note this is different to semi custom rifles being available "off the shelf" from gunshops such as cleavers)
- The rifle must have an RRP of $3100 or less as of 1/7/2022 based on the average of 3 prices available. (note this is a basic figure with the intention to be adjusted by CPI or reviewed annually as per PRS)
- Rifles must be fitted with the original trigger that may be adjusted but must be safe at all times.
- Rifles may have a muzzle brake providing it was factory fitted or the barrel was factory threaded. (this pains me a bit but we need to be accepting)
- Rifle can be fitted with a foldable Harris bipod or similar with a footprint of less than 300mm. Feet can terminate in any method providing they meet local range requirements and do not damage the mound.
- Actions may be bedded to the stocks with epoxy or similar. This is the only modification permitted to the rifle. (Justification for this is several guns are coming out now with factory bedding so it's going to be difficult for anyone to determine if the bedding is factory or done by someone after. Also the price point of rifles I'm trying to incentivise likely have similar quality barrels but bedding could be hit and miss. Allowing bedding will make factory rifles more comparable to one another)
- 1 piece of smooth hard rubber up to a maximum of 16mm thick (conveyor belt or similar) may be placed between the mound and the bipod to provide a uniform surface for the bipod to sit on. This rubber may not have any spikes, rails, or any form of protrusion that would allow it to engage into the ground or for the bipod to engage in it.
- Shooters may use a rear bag for support and use any number of simple spacers to position the bag at the correct height to suit mound conditions. Simple spacers such as solid rubber, timber, steel or cork. Bags and spacers may not have spikes or any form of protrusion that would engage with the ground or bag. No mechanically adjustable rear rests or bag riders.

S/H Open
- Rifles may be factory produced or custom built
- Rifles must be of bolt action repeater type
- Rifle must be of 8mm or less
- Rifles with all attachments must weigh less than 10kg (Yep some of the open PRS rifles are getting up into this range. Not very hunting but pretty sporting)
- Rifles may be fitted with any trigger that may be adjusted but must be safe at all times.
- Rifles may have a muzzle brake (this pains me a bit but we need to be accepting)
- Rifle can be fitted with a foldable Harris bipod or similar. Bipod most not have joystick, screw or fine adjustment such as would be used in FTR. Maximum bipod with of 350mm. Feet can terminate in any method providing they meet local range requirements and do not damage the mound.
- 1 piece of smooth hard rubber up to a maximum of 16mm thick (conveyor belt or similar) may be placed between the mound and the bipod to provide a uniform surface for the bipod to sit on. This rubber may not have any spikes, rails, or any form of protrusion that would allow it to engage into the ground or for the bipod to engage in it.
- Shooters may use a rear bag for support and use any number of simple spacers to position the bag at the correct height to suit mound conditions. Simple spacers such as solid rubber, timber, steel or cork. Bags and spacers may not have spikes or any form of protrusion that would engage with the ground or bag. No mechanically adjustable rear rests or bag riders.

[Tim L]

My basic template for rules would be based around the below

######################

Main aim for S/H is to encourage membership growth by providing and accessible, cost effective, fair and competitive class.

This would be divided into 2 sub classes.

S/H Factory.
- Rifles must be factory produced.
- Rifles must be of bolt action repeater type
- Rifle must be of 8mm or less
- Rifles with all attachments must weigh less than 7kg
- At the ROs request competitors must provide documentation that the rifle is factory produced in the form of brochure, factory website, factory advertisement. (Note this is different to semi custom rifles being available "off the shelf" from gunshops such as cleavers)
- The rifle must have an RRP of $3100 or less as of 1/7/2022 based on the average of 3 prices available. (note this is a basic figure with the intention to be adjusted by CPI or reviewed annually as per PRS)
- Rifles must be fitted with the original trigger that may be adjusted but must be safe at all times.
- Rifles may have a muzzle brake providing it was factory fitted or the barrel was factory threaded. (this pains me a bit but we need to be accepting)
- Rifle can be fitted with a foldable Harris bipod or similar with a footprint of less than 300mm. Feet can terminate in any method providing they meet local range requirements and do not damage the mound.
- Actions may be bedded to the stocks with epoxy or similar. This is the only modification permitted to the rifle. (Justification for this is several guns are coming out now with factory bedding so it's going to be difficult for anyone to determine if the bedding is factory or done by someone after. Also the price point of rifles I'm trying to incentivise likely have similar quality barrels but bedding could be hit and miss. Allowing bedding will make factory rifles more comparable to one another)
- 1 piece of smooth hard rubber up to a maximum of 16mm thick (conveyor belt or similar) may be placed between the mound and the bipod to provide a uniform surface for the bipod to sit on. This rubber may not have any spikes, rails, or any form of protrusion that would allow it to engage into the ground or for the bipod to engage in it.
- Shooters may use a rear bag for support and use any number of simple spacers to position the bag at the correct height to suit mound conditions. Simple spacers such as solid rubber, timber, steel or cork. Bags and spacers may not have spikes or any form of protrusion that would engage with the ground or bag. No mechanically adjustable rear rests or bag riders.

S/H Open
- Rifles may be factory produced or custom built
- Rifles must be of bolt action repeater type
- Rifle must be of 8mm or less
- Rifles with all attachments must weigh less than 10kg (Yep some of the open PRS rifles are getting up into this range. Not very hunting but pretty sporting)
- Rifles may be fitted with any trigger that may be adjusted but must be safe at all times.
- Rifles may have a muzzle brake (this pains me a bit but we need to be accepting)
- Rifle can be fitted with a foldable Harris bipod or similar. Bipod most not have joystick, screw or fine adjustment such as would be used in FTR. Maximum bipod with of 350mm. Feet can terminate in any method providing they meet local range requirements and do not damage the mound.
- 1 piece of smooth hard rubber up to a maximum of 16mm thick (conveyor belt or similar) may be placed between the mound and the bipod to provide a uniform surface for the bipod to sit on. This rubber may not have any spikes, rails, or any form of protrusion that would allow it to engage into the ground or for the bipod to engage in it.
- Shooters may use a rear bag for support and use any number of simple spacers to position the bag at the correct height to suit mound conditions. Simple spacers such as solid rubber, timber, steel or cork. Bags and spacers may not have spikes or any form of protrusion that would engage with the ground or bag. No mechanically adjustable rear rests or bag riders.

OK there are a few deviations there from PRS.

Open. It's OK to drop any FTR rifle onto a Harris bipod with the benefit of having a muzzle brake. There would be quite a few Open rifles with enough lead in the butt to swap for a Harris. I doubt many FO would do it but there would certainly be a few FTR willing to give it a go. Acceptable?

Factory
Where you deviate from PRS, I have to ask why?
7kg, any particular reason or just because it's a reasonable weight?
$3100 gun rather than a $3250 gun?
300mm bipod? Any reason or just reasonable?

Not allowing a muzzle brake if not factory fitted is a huge disadvantage, and probably the biggest problem if the aim is to allow existing PRS rifles to play. I've no idea on what the weight restriction would do, but it would probably exclude a few too. Is it really necessary?

Overall,
Are you happy to see another 2 disciplines at presentation time?

[AlanF]

Today at Rosedale, Tikka T3 6.5x55 with what looked like a 24" light varmint barrel https://shooting.hexsystems.com.au/shooting/467332

[Tim L]

Today at Rosedale, Tikka T3 6.5x55 with what looked like a 24" light varmint barrel https://shooting.hexsystems.com.au/shooting/467332

That's impressive shooting by any standard. Even if that gun is the exception to the general run, it shows what's possible.

Thanks for the post Alan

[Brad Y]

Don’t mean to be ignorant but learnt that a stupid question is the one that isn’t asked.

I was always of the impression that sporter hunter class was never there to be competed in. The objection was to get “bums on seats” ie new people involved and lead them into other disciplines for competition ie fclass. Now that seems to have happened in a very good way. Memberships are on the up. The trouble is I see shooters who have taken steps back from their fc or tr shooting back into the SH class with custom built guns and dominating. Good to see some new members holding their own though too. But what I have also seen is then some weird reason people wanted to push for competition in a class that should in my opinion be at no level higher than weekend club shooting. I know alot of shooters who are very f class accomplished that use SH as a way to keep trigger time up on weekends as a means of reducing costs and wear and tear on competition gear and I see no issue with that. But the problems seem to come from this whole wanting to compete mentality. There are 4 existing classes that could be used for getting competitive urges released. Plus from what I’ve seen, there’s quite a few sh shooters that could give a lot of fc or tr shooters a run for their money.

So my question is- are we looking at it all wrong by bringing more classes in just to make it more competitive? I wish we could look more at alternative disciplines since we already introduced one that should lead people into f class and competition rather than take numbers from it and then cause division within the membership base on how it’s run. To me the value of going to a range and having a shoot for enjoyment with whatever you want seems to have been lost in favour of the urge to prove who is best on the day.

Sorry it’s just my opinion coming from 11 or so years in various disciplines, wanting to compete, wanting to have fun, and now wanting for my kids to grow older quicker so I can get back into f class with them and watch them enjoy their shooting.

[BATattack]

I think there is always going to be some level of completion in any class. That's what sport is about. Even if people aren't taking home trophies they are going to be comparing scores. But in this case participation and membership growth should be the main priority in the structure of the rules.

Your rite Brad. It would be good to keep it to one class but how do you keep the poachers out while also keeping it cost effective and still have the door open for a person who does have a modified rifle but isn't anywhere near FO level.

Like I mentioned before we are really talking about rules that effect people that haven't even been to a range yet so it's not like they are on the forum advocating for themselves.

[PeteFox]

Your rite Brad. It would be good to keep it to one class but how do you keep the poachers out while also keeping it cost effective and still have the door open for a person who does have a modified rifle but isn't anywhere near FO level.

Like I mentioned before we are really talking about rules that effect people that haven't even been to a range yet so it's not like they are on the forum advocating for themselves.

If this is really about growing members, then why not limit to new members (some sort of timeframe here). Shooters coming from F Open to shoot SH really makes a mockery of the intent. This takes away nearly all the discussion about gear and puts it back to the shooter.
FO shooters have the option of PSR.

Pete

[macguru]

Today at Rosedale, Tikka T3 6.5x55 with what looked like a 24" light varmint barrel https://shooting.hexsystems.com.au/shooting/467332

That's impressive shooting by any standard. Even if that gun is the exception to the general run, it shows what's possible.

Thanks for the post Alan

From Hornsby yesterday 800m , 26in 308 savage and someone else got a 50.9 in SH not sure about their rig
but i was using a very std 308 load 155.5s and 46gr 08

https://shooting.hexsystems.com.au/shooting/467659