Jase PTRC wrote:As a relatively newer shooter and someone who has just spent thousands of $$$ building a rifle and buying a front rest getting set up to shoot STD i find all this talk about about fazing out STD to be pretty concerning, not everyone is in a position to build rifles willy nilly and in most cases anyone shooting STD would have to most likely build again or heavily modify their current rifles If STD was to be fazed out because of the weight difference and purchase Bipods to be able to shoot FTR leaving our expensive front rests useless and a waste of money. The only thing Ftr shooters would have to do is use a different reamer to suit the 155's. F std has a very large following Nation wide and im sure there will be others who echo this sentiment. I dont care what bullets you want/have to shoot in FTR and that should have no effect on what anyone else wants to shoot.
Not that simple we use very tight twists nobody is going to ream a 1 in 9 for example to shoot 155's a one in 10 will work but it is not ideal. Then there are the armouring costs to cut down all these not ideal wrong twist barrels (now shorter too) to work with a lighter projectile. Just not worth it we would all have to start again which is just too expensive.. Chris
I get what you are saying Chris, what im getting at is the projectile choice for Ftr should have no bearing on removing or fazing out F Std as a class. If i and anyone else who has started shooting in the last few years wanted to shoot Ftr then we would have built rifles and bought equipment to do so.
Jase PTRC wrote:I get what you are saying Chris, what im getting at is the projectile choice for Ftr should have no bearing on removing or fazing out F Std as a class. If i and anyone else who has started shooting in the last few years wanted to shoot Ftr then we would have built rifles and bought equipment to do so.
Jase, I don't think anyone commenting here wants that to happen, what we are saying is, why would anyone choose to shoot FS if they used a bipod instead of a front rest, a lot of FS shooters I know have rifles that would immediately comply with FTR, same could be said for TR shooters transferring into F-Class.
There is a train of though tin the community already that Pedestals rests should never have been allowed into FS...
Hey Jase, It's ok to phase out Std but not ok to change the projectile for F/TR. I remember the time not so long ago when all projectile manufacturers redesigned their projectiles ( 155 ) Sort of made 14 twist barrels obsolete. Did anybody care that I had 6x 14 twist barrels in the cupboard? I think not. That's progress, wear it. Nobody went broke, did'nt hear any of the barrel manufacturers complaining about getting stuck with heaps of 14 twist barrels and life goes on.
South Africa has proposed this change, apparently because they have difficulty in obtaining heavy projectiles. If the change is approved by ICFRA, they will be setting a precedent, so let's say down the track, another country has a problem with availability of some other important component, what then?
You shouldn't be trying to fix a supply problem with a rules solution. It needs a supply solution.
The South African part is I suspect something of a "red herring" ? I see/hear a good deal of poorly informed whinging/complaining about big bullets in FTR from some folk in the shooting community who have VERY little idea about the realities of actually shooting FTR. It gets tiring to my ears to hear nonsense like the "level playing field" argument. The good shooters win because they are good and work hard to be good. And it doesn't matter what hat I put on : I can't see how a ruling against the big bullets will help or hinder anybody.
If you speak to shooters who've been to RSA you'll find them readily confirming that sourcing components there is a disaster. In that respect, commonality of TR & F/TR components would be desirable there.
If you speak to shooters who've been to RSA you'll find them readily confirming that sourcing components there is a disaster. In that respect, commonality of TR & F/TR components would be desirable there.
John
So they have no issue seeking 155's for TR but have issues getting other projectiles for F-Class, that come very likely, from the same manufactures
Barry Davies wrote:Hey Jase, It's ok to phase out Std but not ok to change the projectile for F/TR. I remember the time not so long ago when all projectile manufacturers redesigned their projectiles ( 155 ) Sort of made 14 twist barrels obsolete. Did anybody care that I had 6x 14 twist barrels in the cupboard? I think not. That's progress, wear it. Nobody went broke, did'nt hear any of the barrel manufacturers complaining about getting stuck with heaps of 14 twist barrels and life goes on.
Not really, I might be wrong, but I think Nick still used a 1 in 14 and he is one of the best standard shooters in Australia.. 1 in 14 is fine for 155's 1 in 9 is not.. Chris
Barry Davies wrote:Hey Jase, It's ok to phase out Std but not ok to change the projectile for F/TR. I remember the time not so long ago when all projectile manufacturers redesigned their projectiles ( 155 ) Sort of made 14 twist barrels obsolete. Did anybody care that I had 6x 14 twist barrels in the cupboard? I think not. That's progress, wear it. Nobody went broke, did'nt hear any of the barrel manufacturers complaining about getting stuck with heaps of 14 twist barrels and life goes on.
Not really, I might be wrong, but I think Nick still used a 1 in 14 and he is one of the best standard shooters in Australia.. 1 in 14 is fine for 155's 1 in 9 is not.. Chris
Might sound a silly question, why wont 155s shoot out of a 9 twist barrel? I know of people using them in 10 twist barrels and they are shooting extremely well.
Barry Davies wrote:Hey Jase, It's ok to phase out Std but not ok to change the projectile for F/TR. I remember the time not so long ago when all projectile manufacturers redesigned their projectiles ( 155 ) Sort of made 14 twist barrels obsolete. Did anybody care that I had 6x 14 twist barrels in the cupboard? I think not. That's progress, wear it. Nobody went broke, did'nt hear any of the barrel manufacturers complaining about getting stuck with heaps of 14 twist barrels and life goes on.
Not really, I might be wrong, but I think Nick still used a 1 in 14 and he is one of the best standard shooters in Australia.. 1 in 14 is fine for 155's 1 in 9 is not.. Chris
Might sound a silly question, why wont 155s shoot out of a 9 twist barrel? I know of people using them in 10 twist barrels and they are shooting extremely well.
A few of reasons spring to mind, first loss in velocity the much tighter twist results in a lower velocity, we have seen this with 215's with 1 in 9 and 1 in 10 in the one in nine they are much slower. Second you risk to strip the jackets with the faster twist this happened with my missus when she went from a 1 in 8 in a 223 to a 1 in 7. Third the tail of the bullet arrives tail down with faster twist at longer distances which is not ideal. I too made a 1 in 10 shoot quite well with 155's but my best barrel was a 1 in 12. About half of my barrels are medium palma's and there just is not room for another chamber anyway and the others would end up rather short never the the armouring cost to change them all and they wont be the ideal twist after anyway. The weight of my stock, bipod, barrel weight has all been based around high recoil heavy projectiles. 156 grain is just a whole other thing.. Chris
Menu
Newest members