OzFclass

Mick_762 wrote:

dazza284 wrote:Well I carry two rear bags as far as I'm concerned when I'm hunting I like to do my hunting before I pull the trigger not after a rear bag helps guarantee a ethical shot at long-range .

I only carry a single rice filled rear bag - for much the same reasons.

Mine are full of them eBay Polly beads.

My suggestion and very easy to implement.

1. No rear bag at all, shoot off the shoulder.
2. Maximum magnification power of 18x.

Those two restrictions will level the playing field significantly.

hunting rifles should be limited to what ammo/reloads fits in the magazine.
calibres doesnt matter,if you cant carry the gun around a paddock or mountain ,all day or even a few hrs,its not a hunting rifle.imo.

ive read all the comments so far.
its pretty obvious most of you havent taken the time to actually read the rules to make an informed decision.pity.

from what some of you are suggesting.
my 10+ yrs old howa with its skinny sporter barrel (thats fired less than 250 rnds) and its flimsy ,nasty plastic stock and its factory warranty replacement scope,would have to jump up to an open class if i put a heavy varmint barrel and a better stock on it .... ?
what about its value ? i swapped a 303 sporter that couldnt put 10 rnds on target at 500 yrds + reloading gear . so ...whats that going to be worth ?
it wont be the scope it came with,a rebarrel isnt cheap and neither is a decent stock....
theres still a hell of a lot of "off the shelf" hunter class rifles worth heaps more than my howa.

I’m probably the type of person that sported/hunter is meant to appeal to. I used to hunt, but the family friend who owned the farm has passed and now with two very small children the chances of me getting out for a whole weekend are minimal.

I’ve been to a QRA introductory shoot, but from my research online I was a bit dubious about the cost requirements to even start shooting FR or F-class and talking to the guys at the shoot basically confirmed that I didn’t have enough cash to burn to compete. Sure, I’m not a good enough shot to compete either, but there’s nothing more demotivating than knowing that you’re doubly disadvantaged by both lack of skill and lack of gear. Basically it seems that even if I did “git gud” then I’d still be uncompetitive without spending a lot of money I don’t have.

I was looking at hunter/sporter, even though most of the people I spoke to at the QRA seemed to look down their nose at it, but from the rules as I currently read them it’s basically just a slightly lighter F-class.

A weight limit of 6.5kg seems pretty heavy; from what I can work out, a 26” Howa in a Hogue stock weights about 4kg and a 56mm Delta Stryker scope weights a smidgen over a kilogram. Even with lightweight bipod and rail, I’m not lugging that around while hunting.

I feel like a lot of the rules to make this a somewhat realistic hunting analog would all sort themselves out with a lower weight limit. 26” barrel maximum seems sensible. No chassis. Repeater. I suggest minimum energy requirements along the lines of muzzle energy 2000 ft-lbs (although this may not even be necessary).

Ultimately, and this is just how I feel so others may feel otherwise, if someone turns up with a custom rifle that’s trued, carbon fibre stock, 26” custom barrel etc and I have a 22” Tikka in a walnut factory stock then at least I still feel like I’m shooting in the same class if both systems weight 5kg. If we’re both poor shots then I can probably still compete and if it really gets to me then a (admittedly probably expensive) rebarrel would close most of the gap.

If the aim is just an economy class (rather than a true hunting class), then allowing chassis and a higher weight limit is fine; just go with the fixed bid system from folk racing (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folkrace). Funnily enough, the old April Fool’s about e-class shooting was pretty much on target (pun not intended, but I’ll leave it there).

As as I said, my experience is minimal, but this is what has put me off from club shooting. I simply do not have the money to spend on something suitable for F-class or F-TR (especially in the current climate) and the clubs I spoke to don’t have a left-handed club rifle.

Here ends my “why did I even bother to write that?” meandering. Thanks for reading if you got this far.

BlazedSpaniel wrote:I’m probably the type of person that sported/hunter is meant to appeal to. I used to hunt, but the family friend who owned the farm has passed and now with two very small children the chances of me getting out for a whole weekend are minimal.

I’ve been to a QRA introductory shoot, but from my research online I was a bit dubious about the cost requirements to even start shooting FR or F-class and talking to the guys at the shoot basically confirmed that I didn’t have enough cash to burn to compete. Sure, I’m not a good enough shot to compete either, but there’s nothing more demotivating than knowing that you’re doubly disadvantaged by both lack of skill and lack of gear. Basically it seems that even if I did “git gud” then I’d still be uncompetitive without spending a lot of money I don’t have.

I was looking at hunter/sporter, even though most of the people I spoke to at the QRA seemed to look down their nose at it, but from the rules as I currently read them it’s basically just a slightly lighter F-class.

A weight limit of 6.5kg seems pretty heavy; from what I can work out, a 26” Howa in a Hogue stock weights about 4kg and a 56mm Delta Stryker scope weights a smidgen over a kilogram. Even with lightweight bipod and rail, I’m not lugging that around while hunting.

I feel like a lot of the rules to make this a somewhat realistic hunting analog would all sort themselves out with a lower weight limit. 26” barrel maximum seems sensible. No chassis. Repeater. I suggest minimum energy requirements along the lines of muzzle energy 2000 ft-lbs (although this may not even be necessary).

Ultimately, and this is just how I feel so others may feel otherwise, if someone turns up with a custom rifle that’s trued, carbon fibre stock, 26” custom barrel etc and I have a 22” Tikka in a walnut factory stock then at least I still feel like I’m shooting in the same class if both systems weight 5kg. If we’re both poor shots then I can probably still compete and if it really gets to me then a (admittedly probably expensive) rebarrel would close most of the gap.

If the aim is just an economy class (rather than a true hunting class), then allowing chassis and a higher weight limit is fine; just go with the fixed bid system from folk racing (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folkrace). Funnily enough, the old April Fool’s about e-class shooting was pretty much on target (pun not intended, but I’ll leave it there).

As as I said, my experience is minimal, but this is what has put me off from club shooting. I simply do not have the money to spend on something suitable for F-class or F-TR (especially in the current climate) and the clubs I spoke to don’t have a left-handed club rifle.

Here ends my “why did I even bother to write that?” meandering. Thanks for reading if you got this far.

You are very much right mate. You are the person that I believe the class was intended for. Proper factory hunting guns not big budget custom builds. We have a father and son who come and shoot at our range with a tikka 308 and they are enjoying themselves. This is why we have to stabilise and protect the rules of hunter class and keep the trophy hunting hacks away from changing the rules. I hope you spend some time shooting your rifle on one of our ranges. There are some fantastic people who want to see more new members, such as yourself, enjoying what you have.

I like the idea of Sport/Hunter class,though specially crafted builds turn me off.As most shooters only shoot at their own club worrying about being being competitive is probably not a big issue.
The important thing is to get on the mound and have a go.You really have to be in a club and get to know how things work as well enjoy the company.
Lately I have been shooting Sport/Hunter at our club with an old Ruger 77 Varminter .223 and a Lynx 20x scope,not that well,but still enjoyable.
Hopefully you can give it a try.

I bought an off the shelf tikka UPR and fitted a scope to it. The whole thing weighs a bit over 5kg with a harris bipod and it shoots a good as anything else ... its a bit light but you get used to it.

I'm new to the sport.

The Sport/Hunter Class appeals as a good entry level to the sport.

Let's face it, the sport needs to boost participation levels to survive politically. The introduction of S/H class seems to have been a measure designed to assist in boosting participation levels, club memberships etc.

However, it is going to be a big turn-off if the class just turns into an "arms race" of equipment. A person, who is skilled should be able to compete without spending big or customising the rifle.

Anecdotally I have been told that the winner of the S/H class in the Vic Kings was toting some pretty elaborate gear. Not something you'd lug through the mountains stalking a deer.

What's the point of this class if not to allow the skill of the shooter to be the major factor, rather than the gear? Why not restrict it to factor built hunting rifle and factory ammunition? If you wanna replace the barrel, then it should be equivalent to what came from the factory? Why should you be able to replace the stock? I mean if you can just replace everything it becomes a different rifle.

I've purchased a moderate hunting rife and a 2.5 x 10 scope, something that is good for hunting. If I can't compete with this then the class is nor really hunting class, but something else.

Cheers

T

DingoDeerHunter wrote:I'm new to the sport.

The Sport/Hunter Class appeals as a good entry level to the sport.

Let's face it, the sport needs to boost participation levels to survive politically. The introduction of S/H class seems to have been a measure designed to assist in boosting participation levels, club memberships etc.

However, it is going to be a big turn-off if the class just turns into an "arms race" of equipment. A person, who is skilled should be able to compete without spending big or customising the rifle.

Anecdotally I have been told that the winner of the S/H class in the Vic Kings was toting some pretty elaborate gear. Not something you'd lug through the mountains stalking a deer.

What's the point of this class if not to allow the skill of the shooter to be the major factor, rather than the gear? Why not restrict it to factor built hunting rifle and factory ammunition? If you wanna replace the barrel, then it should be equivalent to what came from the factory? Why should you be able to replace the stock? I mean if you can just replace everything it becomes a different rifle.

I've purchased a moderate hunting rife and a 2.5 x 10 scope, something that is good for hunting. If I can't compete with this then the class is nor really hunting class, but something else.

Cheers

T

Hi T,

To give you an idea, the Vic Kings winner used a Tikka T3, in an off-the-shelf MDT chassis, with a 6mm Creedmoor barrel and a Nightforce 32x scope, weighing in under the 6.5kg limit. Yes, it's a nice rifle. Yes, it's in a non-traditional calibre. But it's not an outrageous rifle. The shooter in question is a former F-Open shooter, is one hell of a steerer in the wind and has spent an enormous amount of time practicing and perfecting his technique and loads, and that's where he won, not just having a good rifle. Graeme Kerr, who ran second, used a factory Tikka 223 and 300WSM, both are his hunting rifles.

Attached is a photo of all rifles used at 1000yd on the day to give you an idea. Most of the rifles in the class were a mix of factory or semi-custom rifles of all varieties, including a factory Howa Mini 223, factory Ruger Precision, factory Tikka T3X Varmint 223 & 300WSM, rebarrelled but otherwise stock Tikka 243, factory Rem 788 6.5Creed etc.



I 100% agree that we don't want this to become an F-Class arms race.

Hey, thanks for the clarification. It's not as bad as I was made out to believe, but by the same token, no hunter is prowling the hills with those giant scopes - the field of view is just way too small.

I mean, I thought Rule 23.e of the SSR's was pretty clear, the opening words (prior to the specific prohibitions or descriptions) states:

"23.3 Any rifle bought as astandard factory-made practical walk around
sporting/hunting/varmint rifle andwithout the features or attachments that
would place it in the style of a target, matchor service rifle..."

People focus a lot on the specifics that come after these words, but classic interpretation of these types of things by Courts always interprets the specifics with the spirit or context of the opening words preceding them, and the spirit of these words in the SSR's really mean it should be a rifle that a person would reasonably take hunting, would be in all respects "standard factor-made". Further, the attachment of common F Class competition scopes place a rifle in the style of a target rifle doesn't it?

I really think the maximum scope magnification should be (first number) 3x - otherwise the field of view means its not really a hunting rifle. I mean, the reason that the Iron Sight scoring is used is that a hunting scope shouldn't see much more than a giant black dot at 1000 yards, just like the Target Rifle crew using open sights.

Anyway, what it means is that people like me who use only a "real" hunting rifle and suitable scope for hunting are likely to drift way from the sport as it becomes clear that we need a "special" competition hunting rifle to be within a bull's roar in any competition.

Thanks again for clarifying, it was just dissapointing to see all those Nightforce 32x scopes. Next we will see the 10 x 55 scopes in hunter class - because, after all, things you hunt never actually move more than a few inches in the forest do they?

T

Apologies,

Having read through some other threads on this topic, I can see all points have been made and I am, as you say, very late to the party. It’ll be what it’ll be, wait and see.

T

DingoDeerHunter wrote:Apologies,

Having read through some other threads on this topic, I can see all points have been made and I am, as you say, very late to the party. It’ll be what it’ll be, wait and see.

T

Yeah it’s a very circular argument when you start scrolling back through, hey?

Also - have a look at what some of the long range deer hunters are using. Their gear makes ours look pedestrian. $8000 rangefinder/self adjusting scopes, titanium rifles etc etc. Some insane kit. A few of those rifles in the previous photo were blooded, with 50x Kahles scopes on them even. “Hunting rifle” is no longer a Remchester 30-06 and shots taken at 50yd, which makes it even harder.

I still love the NZ rules for Hunter Class and F-PR

Weairy wrote:
I still love the NZ rules for Hunter Class and F-PR

[/quote]

Yeah, the NZ rules were what I had envisaged when I first saw this class mentioned. I just looked them up:

“ Rules
1. A competition for standard factory hunting rifles of any calibre that do not exceed the energy limits on NRANZ ranges.
2. Rifle weight will not exceed 4.1 kg (9.02 lb) and if a bipod or suppressor is fitted then they are included in the all-up weight of the rifle.
3. Any sights, open aperture, or optical up to 10x magnification may be used.
4. Ammunition can be handloads or factory ammunition using hunting or match bullets that will work in the standard factory twist rates for that calibre.
5. Rifles may be rebarreled if necessary, but the replacement must be the same twist rate and profile as the factory original.
6. Rifles may be bedded in their stocks for best performance, but any other modifications from standard, such as Bull-barrels, or barrel fluting to stay within weight, that are seen to be pursuing an unfair advantage are banned. In any competition The Match director/Range Officer has the final say on whether a rifle meets the intent of a practical, walk-around hunting rifle.
7. Matches are to be 2 convertible sighters and 5 shots for record on standard NRANZ targets. Scoring to be 5 & V. Normal time limits for ranges to apply.
8. Rifles may only be supported by a backpack or a hunting bipod (Harris, Caldwell, or similar) but no rear bag or other rear support can be used. Only the front of the rifle may be supported. The rifle must be held in the hands, clear of the ground.”

A true test….

Morning All,
I totally agree and understand the above feelings /concerns, but there seems to be much emphasis placed on the "hunter" part. The other half is sport!
Cheers Phil

bolster55 wrote:Morning All,
I totally agree and understand the above feelings /concerns, but there seems to be much emphasis placed on the "hunter" part. The other half is sport!
Cheers Phil

Exactly!