Proposal to Limit F/TR Projectiles to 156 Grains

[Gyro]

Leaving aside the barrel twist rate questions I would suggest Chris if you've got "all the bugs ironed out" of your big bullet shooting platform/system then you will hit the ground running if you shoot 155s from that same setup !

[BATattack]

OK so again. other than "I already have barrels and stacks of other CONSUMABLES" is there any other major issues?

Id suggest that rite now there are probably 30 people tops in FTR that could win a queens. Why is that? Is that because there are no better shooters out there? Or is it because there is a limit to the number of people that can AFFORD to compete at that level . . . . and can AFFORD to buy 9 barrels and 1000s of $85/ box bullets?

Why am I moving away from open? because I'm looking forward to the challenge of shooting from a less stable platform which is more technique based with longer barrel life and components that are easier to source.

Looking 10-20years into the future what do you want to see or be a part of? Do you want to win a OPM , Queens or world championship because you are fortunate enough to have the income or live in a country where the latest components are readily available? To be part of a struggling or failed state or national association that cant afford to support its dwindling members? Me personally I'd take more pride in winning, or even placing, at a highly competitive event that is accessible to a large group of people. Realistically I know that if f class became less equipment $$$$ based and more shooter skill based I know I will slide down the ranks as there are some very talented shooters that could do well domestically and internationally if the arms race was leveled a bit. At the moment I am one of the fortunate ones to be able to buy quality gear to stay near the pointy end but leveling the playing field and making the sport more accesable may see increased membership and improved sources of income which is what we need to strengthen the sport and associations.


Look into the future, think about an international discipline which is financially and equipment assessable, easy to transport and highly competitive. Do the current f classes fit into that?

[Gyro]

Some good points ..... BUT an FTR shooter does not have to or even need to buy 9 barrels etc. That's thier choice of course. And why the numbers in the sport are not great is another story I reckon ?

What is happening in FTR I believe, for better or worse, is there's a lot of innovation and development going on with the "shooting platform". Remember that the likes of F Open has been able to borrow from a LOT of the learning that's been collected from many years of Benchrest shooting.

I come from a Mechanical design background and have built all my stocks for the 6 years I've been playing with FTR mostly and now im crossing back to F Open. I do all my gunsmithing too. This discussion is NOT about me though.

To rule against the big bullets would NOT limit any spending. People still want to do that and besides spending keeps the world going round .....

Ultimately all of us would like to see more people in the sport.

I'm off to work ......

[daj]

Re the twist rate/velocities argument, here is an article by Bryan Litz. http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/201 ... litz-test/

[Pommy Chris]

Some good points ..... BUT an FTR shooter does not have to or even need to buy 9 barrels etc. That's thier choice of course. And why the numbers in the sport are not great is another story I reckon ?

What is happening in FTR I believe, for better or worse, is there's a lot of innovation and development going on with the "shooting platform". Remember that the likes of F Open has been able to borrow from a LOT of the learning that's been collected from many years of Benchrest shooting.

I come from a Mechanical design background and have built all my stocks for the 6 years I've been playing with FTR mostly and now im crossing back to F Open. I do all my gunsmithing too. This discussion is NOT about me though.

To rule against the big bullets would NOT limit any spending. People still want to do that and besides spending keeps the world going round .....

Ultimately all of us would like to see more people in the sport.

I'm off to work ......

Many of us going to Canada bought multiple barrels to get the best for the Worlds with the thinking that all the barrels would get used anyway over the next few years. Non of us thought that we would buy and chamber barrels that we might not be able to use in a few months if the rules change.
Chris

[bsouthernau]

Many of us going to Canada bought multiple barrels to get the best for the Worlds with the thinking that all the barrels would get used anyway over the next few years. Non of us thought that we would buy and chamber barrels that we might not be able to use in a few months if the rules change.
Chris

I am in favour of no change, however I think the rules should be based on principles rather than on how many people already own how much gear.

I'll also point out that the change being considered is to the ICFRA rules. When NRAA adopted F/TR it chose to "copy and paste" the ICFRA rules into our SSRs rather than just say, as is the case with 300m ISSF, that we'll follow the international rules. I considered this a blunder, and still do, but it means that, whatever the outcome of the meeting in Canada, any projectile will remain legal for F/TR in domestic competition until the SSRs are changed.

Barry

[Gyro]

Yep. Sort of "Aussie Rules" lol.

I believe your F Open class can use spiked boards at the back end ? That aint ICFRA. That's a bloody good idea though when you are setting up on a dodgy mound.

Getting off topic here but.

[Gyro]

......not to mention a certain cricketing incident from days gone by that certainly was not ICFRA. That was a bit of good Aussie resourcefulness though lol

[Punti]

Hi Bob Pedersen, the reasons I choose this discipline it was the cheaper option at that time for my family of four shooters. It also gave me the opportunity to help juniors into the sport of shooting.

Unfortunately, family members and juniors especially has decreased in growth today. Why? because like all discipline’s we strive to win at all cost.

Bob I would like you and the NRAA Board to consider these points,

1 No change to FTR rules, to restrict to 156g projectile.
Working in parallel with Match Rifle and Long Range F-Class

2 Adopt FTR A grade with projectile restriction to 156g Australian made projectile.
Keeping cost down and working parallel with Target Rifle

3 Adopt FTR AA grade using Australian made components, action, barrel, brass, primer, powder and projectiles.
We must be Patriotic to our Country working to help all Australian families in the sport of shooting this should be our priority.

Kind Regards

Mike Punturiero

[BATattack]

Many of us going to Canada bought multiple barrels to get the best for the Worlds with the thinking that all the barrels would get used anyway over the next few years. Non of us thought that we would buy and chamber barrels that we might not be able to use in a few months if the rules change.
Chris

I am in favour of no change, however I think the rules should be based on principles rather than on how many people already own how much gear.

I'll also point out that the change being considered is to the ICFRA rules. When NRAA adopted F/TR it chose to "copy and paste" the ICFRA rules into our SSRs rather than just say, as is the case with 300m ISSF, that we'll follow the international rules. I considered this a blunder, and still do, but it means that, whatever the outcome of the meeting in Canada, any projectile will remain legal for F/TR in domestic competition until the SSRs are changed.

Barry

Providing we have components and resources available domestically we should be copying ICFRA rules word for word. That way you have shooters shooting every week under the same rules everyone else in the world and no changes would be required for those who shoot OS. Major rule changes can only be made through the ICFRA council not changed every few months via NRAA. Look at the rules of FS if you want to see the result of a domestic rule fiddling . . . . . . bullet pointing, rear bags in wooden boxes, front rests with .5mm layer of cotton cloth over delron runners, rear plates with spikes and adjustable legs. I shoot with a rear plate and spikes in open but I'd happily go away from it if full it was removed and everyone else was required to do the same in order to align with ICFRA.

[Gyro]

I'm all done with this thread but just wanted to say i believe allowing levelling methods for both the front and rear rests ( which is not ICFRA ) is a good idea especially when the mounds can be uneven.

We have a number of regional mounds here in NZ that are not great for various reasons so of course it's hardly fair when some shooters get the uneven ground while others can through good luck or management get a much better part of the mound to set up on. Regards Rob Kerridge.

[SunnyCoast 5r]

Would make my (virginal) new Maddco barrel set up for 185/200 gn pills an expensive paperweight...maybe I could rechamber it to 300 WSM and go pig shooting...

On the plus side the 155s are pretty good.

Any limit on the 223 projectiles?

[bsouthernau]

Well, the poll was 38 to 30 in favour of no change. When might we find out the NRAA position on this?

[macguru]

Why cant your 10 or even 9 twist Maddco shoot 155s just fine ? Is the throat too long ? 155.5s seem pretty jump tolerant.

I am getting an 8 twist varmint krieger on my 300wsm experimental rifle, because i could not find a 9 in the profile i wanted. I am going to try 155-230gr in that.

[Matt P]

Well, the poll was 38 to 30 in favour of no change. When might we find out the NRAA position on this?

I'd say the decision has been made considering the ICFRA meeting is only a few weeks away.
A decision as important as this should have gone to the STA's for input.
Nothing as yet.
But if we want small rules cleaned up or hold the next FCWC it has to come from the STA !!!!!
Double standards !!!!!
Matt Paroz