OzFclass

Hi All
I have no intention if ever shooting this competitively, maybe the odd club shoot. I have a rifle that complies with Open class. It's a Borden Super Short repeater action, Brux Remington HV chambered in 6mm BR Ackley, MDT ACC chassis and Leupold 8.5x25 with Atlas Bipod comes in @ 7kg. Allowing this will be bad for the sport, this would be a very competitive package but IMO would take away from the intent of this Class which is membership and reasonably priced entry point into our sport.
The original intent of this class was never the rifle described above !!! It was aimed at new members and participation !!
I have 4 different brand barrels in the shop at the moment all of them sold as "Heavy Varmint", they vary in muzzle diameter from 0.875" - 0.950". The cheapest being an IBI ($499) which is 0.950 to the dearest a Brux @ $925.
The rules are on the right path but need to be cleaned up quickly (and the next review is to far away, by then the horse will have bolted) or we'll have a repeat of F Standard.
The first things that come to mind are PRODUCTION ACTIONS ONLY and a overall weight limit rather than a barrel profile limit as it's easier to enforce (is a RO going to carry a pair of Verniers in his pocket) and allows for variations in barrel profile. Standard calibres no wildcats or Improved unless available in a factory offering. There are more but I won't bore you any longer.
To those that read down to here thankyou.
Regards
Matt Paroz

I think the rules are a great start, and up to and including 23.3, make a lot of sense and are reasonably clear. At 23.4 PCO things go a little haywire and it seems a little incomplete.

23.4 appears to conflict with the preamble below the chapter title “This discipline is intended to allow commercially available (shop purchased) …”

If PCO is not limited to Rebarreled or rechambered production rifles, 23.4.1 doesn’t make sense because the barrel dimension restrictions refer to a “Rebarrelled or rechambered Production Class rifle with a replacement barrel not exceeding heavy varmint profile not exceeding 22.86 mm …” A custom action is not a “Rebarrelled or rechambered production class rifle with a replacement barrel” and therefore arguably not subject to the dimension limitations that follow those words.

The use of the words “Production Class Open” as the name of the class described in 23.4 also doesn’t make sense if custom actions are within the class. Pedantic perhaps …. But re read the intent statement in the discipline description.

But then I see the NRAA website post at https://nraa.com.au/nraa-news/1-july-20 ... -the-nraa/
and the apparent intent is that Open is designed to include custom builds with custom actions like Matt describes. Had I not read the NRAA website post, I would have interpreted 23.4 as being limited to rebarrelled production class rifles.

I also think there is a typo in 24.4 - it refers back to rifles fitting in the rules outlined in 23.2, when I think it should 23.3 which specifies the production class.

Perhaps the split into two classes occurred right at the end of the rule development process leading to the conflicting text in 24.4? Or did earlier drafts limit PCO to what it name infers - rebarrelled production class rifles?

Just one person’s thoughts and I don’t intend to appear critical of the rules committee. They have a tough job working though all of the views on this and needed to come out with something quickly given the rapid development of the discipline. Like Matt, I think the rules, particularly 23.4, need review sooner rather than later.

Ian P

Matt P wrote:Hi All

The first things that come to mind are PRODUCTION ACTIONS ONLY and a overall weight limit rather than a barrel profile limit as it's easier to enforce
Regards
Matt Paroz

Yes, the making of unnecessary rules and ending up with a lot of unintended consequences.
A weigh limit is a definable absolute, a HV barrel is whatever a barrel maker defines it as, so we have the ridiculous situation of 2 rules that contradict each other -a HV barrel is OK but only some of them.

Barrel length - how are we going to measure that?
I do it from the bolt face, but I sure wouldn't want some RO sticking a cleaning rod down my barrel. It seems that rule makers have learnt very little from past mistakes and don't understand that ambiguity is the last thing needed. So if the methodology is not defined then it is open to interpretation


Pete

I could have missed it as I only read the rules quickly. But I couldn’t find a reference to the rifle having to be a repeater - from memory the previous rules had a particular reference to it.

Matt P wrote:Hi All
I have no intention if ever shooting this competitively, maybe the odd club shoot. I have a rifle that complies with Open class. It's a Borden Super Short repeater action, Brux Remington HV chambered in 6mm BR Ackley, MDT ACC chassis and Leupold 8.5x25 with Atlas Bipod comes in @ 7kg. Allowing this will be bad for the sport, this would be a very competitive package but IMO would take away from the intent of this Class which is membership and reasonably priced entry point into our sport.
The original intent of this class was never the rifle described above !!! It was aimed at new members and participation !!
I have 4 different brand barrels in the shop at the moment all of them sold as "Heavy Varmint", they vary in muzzle diameter from 0.875" - 0.950". The cheapest being an IBI ($499) which is 0.950 to the dearest a Brux @ $925.
The rules are on the right path but need to be cleaned up quickly (and the next review is to far away, by then the horse will have bolted) or we'll have a repeat of F Standard.
The first things that come to mind are PRODUCTION ACTIONS ONLY and a overall weight limit rather than a barrel profile limit as it's easier to enforce (is a RO going to carry a pair of Verniers in his pocket) and allows for variations in barrel profile. Standard calibres no wildcats or Improved unless available in a factory offering. There are more but I won't bore you any longer.
To those that read down to here thankyou.
Regards
Matt Paroz

Totally Agree Matt-
I thought it was to attract as you said membership as it did with me, the rifle I had in the safe for everyday use hunting SAKO 85- after years of use it was time to rebarrel it choosing an Australian swan with the total weight now being 5.9kg scope and bipod included - I hunt and compete with this setup- this setup will now be moved into PCO against setups as you have just stated - absolutley ludicrous- - I enjoy my shooting and have supported the class since kick off but I am not going to waste money travelling to OPM’s or Kings being disadvantaged from the start - I agree it will be bad for the sport if this allowance is continued and not addressed -

I think that someone(s) has gone to a lot of trouble to come up with a set of rules and we need to work with them for 12 months, so by all means come up with ideas but these rules are an improvement. The sort of people that enter comps can have a decent rifle for that (PCO) and at a club level we can have PC. Someone may run PC in a comp but that remains to be seen. I agree with the criticisms raised about the line between PC and PCO being a bit off but that only becomes a problem if people run both divisions in a comp and that may not happen ? Now that I have said that it probably will

I noticed a few issues when I first read the new rules. I come at this being a RO in both bigbore and smallbore and having helped write the TRA F-Class Smallbore rules.

First, Rule 23.4.1 the muzzle diameter rule. This rule isnt needed. As Matt P has already shown, you can run a bigger HV with a 0.950 like the IBI and turn down the diameter to .900 and your legal. That alone shows that rule is stupid. Im happy with overall weight, but our goal is to grow membership, this rule will stop alot of PSR, PRS, etc shooters form being legal at comps and as these guys are competitive, they are more likely to attend OPMs, etc. Also think how are we going to police it, is every RO going to carry verniers, etc to check at all times. Theres also the issue that if you have a brake, are measuring the muzzle as its threaded or behind the thread or with a thread cap if threaded and no brake fitted at the time??? Also, with this we have now said that an Australian Barrel Manufacturer cant supply barrels to meet the rules as Maddco are .950 for his HV contour, so we cant run maddcos now???

2nd, rule 23.1.12 the lack of stacking plates. This means that people will have to start buying either new bipods that go lower/higher which is more cost, or run several different rear bags to cater for different mounds. This either way means more cost for shooters, wheres as a few rubber 200mmx200mm can be bought from bunnings for 10 bux for 2 which usually will help cater for these issues and keep cost down.

3rd, Rule 23.1.10 front rests. The rule says and I quote "the front of the rifle MAY be supported by a sporting type folding bipod" now may means not 100% it just MAY be used so what other options do we have? A pack, front sandbag, etc. This needs clarification as an RO, I would allow a backpack, sandbag, etc as the rule says MAY, not SHALL or WILL.

4th. Rule 23.4.2. Total weight is 7.5kg, no issues there, what if however someone has additional weights that bring it up to 7.5kg to make it better for PRS, PSR, etc. Are they now required to remove them even if the rifle all up is under 7.5kg???

5th Rule 23.1.8 Scope power. Have fun policing that. I know from experience with Smallbore F-Class we have a scope power rule for our sporter class that its hard to police, especially at club shoots. For comps we tape the scope to 16x which is max for that but for long range this could give issues as we may need to adjust for mirage, etc.

These are all valid questions and need to be clarified soonest.

wording changed to “None humanoid looking targets.”

Maybe alien looking ones?

I still believe the standard "production class" should run factory ammo

"Maybe alien looking ones?"

With all the recent publicity about UAPs (ufos) I dont think we should do anything to upset our alien overlords ....

Quick wrote:5th Rule 23.1.8 Scope power. Have fun policing that. I know from experience with Smallbore F-Class we have a scope power rule for our sporter class that its hard to police, especially at club shoots. For comps we tape the scope to 16x which is max for that but for long range this could give issues as we may need to adjust for mirage, etc.

I like this rule actually. Reason being that it allows shooters to buy a good F-Class scope at the get go, so no need to upgrade if they move up to open class or any of the F-Classes. And besides, the basic class is not intended for "sheep stations" competition, so strict policing of rules not as important as for other classes?

Alan, problem is that it is getting competitive so shooters will see if that way. If its not policed, some will complain and others will just discretely increase their scope power.

I do agree with you that the class was designed to be to get people into the sport, and its the way I should be.

Under the new rules, can a single shot rifle such as an Omark be used or would that fall under having “the features or attachments that would deem it in the style of target rifle”?

mcourtin wrote:Under the new rules, can a single shot rifle such as an Omark be used or would that fall under having “the features or attachments that would deem it in the style of target rifle”?

Bloody good question, what is a 'Target Rifle'?
As most cartridges used won't be 223 or 308, does that mean it a free for all like Fopen?

I am finding the fact that all you blokes think that because someone rolls up with a PCO rifle you automatically think they can drive it .
That's not what I've seen over the years .

dazza284 wrote:I am finding the fact that all you blokes think that because someone rolls up with a PCO rifle you automatically think they can drive it .
That's not what I've seen over the years .

Guilty.....
I'm a cheque book sniper
The only way I'll hit 50 and 10 is if I set my credit card limit to $5010