OzFclass

Hi Guys,

There is murmings around the traps about Sporter/Hunter Class.

It appears that already the way forward with this new class has been derailed, and perhaps the same arms race has stated as we have in F/C Std and F/C Open.

What is needed to really kick things along is an "off the shelf" discipline, where some one can buy a" Mass produced rifle and shoot it with store brought ammo"

Could be as simple as........

The rifle must be shot as delivered and configured from the Factory, a "Harris' style bipod may be used to suport the front of the rifle and a rear "Sand Bag" rest with out packers or leveling boards to support the rear of the rifle.
Any replacement parts used on the rifle must be Manufacturer issued replacement spare parts.


Keen to hear some thoughts
Cheers
Mick

mick l wrote:Hi Guys,

There is murmings around the traps about Sporter/Hunter Class.

It appears that already the way forward with this new class has been derailed, and perhaps the same arms race has stated as we have in F/C Std and F/C Open.

What is needed to really kick things along is an "off the shelf" discipline, where some one can buy a" Mass produced rifle and shoot it with store brought ammo"

Could be as simple as........

The rifle must be shot as delivered and configured from the Factory, a "Harris' style bipod may be used to suport the front of the rifle and a rear "Sand Bag" rest with out packers or leveling boards to support the rear of the rifle.
Any replacement parts used on the rifle must be Manufacturer issued replacement spare parts.


Keen to hear some thoughts
Cheers
Mick

Can you elaborate on how the race has kicked off?

I thought there were already reasonable tight rules.

In essence 2 classes “factory” & “custom” which helped keep the field level, is this not the case?

It's a hard class to tighten up the rules on straight away; the idea of this class is to be as inclusive as possible. Should numbers prove to be serious enough, then 100%, it should have a factory-standard and an Open division, much like the PRS.

Clause 23.3 of the SSRS states: "Any rifle bought as a standard factory-made practical walk around sporting/hunting/varmint rifle and without the features or attachments that would place it in the style of a target, match or service rifle".

This means the event organizers can simply say that a particular rifle has modifications/attachments/features which make it a target rifle, not a sporting/hunting rifle. So for instance, you can't just throw a Barnard in a target stock on a Harris bipod with a March High-Master scope on it and go blitz the competition. I interpret this as you need to buy a standard rifle (Howa 1500, Tikka T3, Rem 700 etc) and bolt a scope on it that would be deemed reasonable for hunting/sporting (not a 50x target scope). To me, this means no tac chassis rifles, no adjustable stocks, no Defiance/Curtis actions etc.

I think the class is still viable for grass roots, as long as there's a bit of policing done to keep rifles within the realms of reason.

Josh,
So by your "To me, this means no tac chassis rifles, "
You are ruling out the factory Tikka Tac A1.
An off the shelf, factory rifle.

You cannot expect people to turn up with a plastic stocked hunting rifle with an 8x scope, get a crap score and keep coming back week after week in some form of masochistic activity. If they can get a varmint rifle, fine. If they are rich enough to get a sako TRG or AI, then I think you should make them welcome. Its still hard to shoot off a harris bipod, and if they want to they could even try FTR

macguru wrote:You cannot expect people to turn up with a plastic stocked hunting rifle with an 8x scope, get a crap score and keep coming back week after week in some form of masochistic activity. If they can get a varmint rifle, fine. If they are rich enough to get a sako TRG or AI, then I think you should make them welcome. Its still hard to shoot off a harris bipod, and if they want to they could even try FTR

We have two new members shooting standard Rem700 223s on Harris bipods with hand loads and 9 power scopes. One has had a rebarrel and shoots 50s at 600yd with no troubles, the other is a stock barrel which shoots 46s with a mix of hand loads and factory. And they’re having an absolute ball.

I know you’ve thrown your Savage in a MDT chassis, which in my opinion, is going outside of the spirit of the class. It’s a modification that makes it a target rifle. As the rules are currently written, it might not comply.

But this is where a modified/open/tactical/PRS sub-discipline would be ideal…

Mick_762 wrote:Josh,
So by your "To me, this means no tac chassis rifles, "
You are ruling out the factory Tikka Tac A1.
An off the shelf, factory rifle.

An off the shelf rifle, not really designed as a practical, walk around hunting rifle. The Tikka TAC and the Lithgow LA105 are two examples of factory rifles that don’t really fit the rules as they’re written. Keep in mind, that’s my opinion and my interpretation of the rules as they’re currently written. I wouldn’t turn someone away if they came to shoot with either rifle; but if I were running a Sporting/Hunter comp, it’d be really touch and go. If the rifle was stock standard with a 12 power scope or similar, fine. But if it’s clearly a rifle that has been modded up for target shooting and pushed the rule book (rebarrel, high power scope etc) then it’s not really fitting the spirit of the class.

Again, it’s a bloody hard one to decide where to draw the line and how to maintain the heart of the class and keep it inclusive.

"I know you’ve thrown yours in a MDT chassis, which in my opinion, is going outside of the spirit of the class. It’s a modification that makes it a target rifle."

Well thats a matter of opinion, and I have a different opinion..... There are alot of well heeled shooters in clubs that like the sniper rifle look and feel, some with a lot more money than me. I think that if they want to take the journey to upgrade their rifles, or they are rich enough to buy a TRG with a nightforce scope, then we should accomodate them. Shooting a 26in barrelled rifle off a harris bipod is still not competetive with FTR/FS/FO, and deserves its own class. Many of those with cheaper rifles will choose to take that journey and upgrade, and thats better than have them stop turning up because they are discouraged. I know I have learned alot about what determines accuracy at each step in the process.

macguru wrote:"I know you’ve thrown yours in a MDT chassis, which in my opinion, is going outside of the spirit of the class. It’s a modification that makes it a target rifle."

Well thats a matter of opinion, and I have a different opinion..... There are alot of well heeled shooters in clubs that like the sniper rifle look and feel, some with a lot more money than me. I think that if they want to take the journey to upgrade their rifles, or they are rich enough to buy a TRG with a nightforce scope, then we should accomodate them. Shooting a 26in barrelled rifle off a harris bipod is still not competetive with FTR/FS/FO, and deserves its own class. Many of those with cheaper rifles will choose to take that journey and upgrade, and thats better than have them stop turning up because they are discouraged.

The idea was to have a class that was kinda “come and shoot what you’ve got”. If they’re keen to spend up and keep shooting, the idea was to push people towards F Std/TR/Open. That’s the essence of the class. Which I disagree with to an extent.

It can be it’s own competitive class, 100%. But if I rock up with my Rem700 308 with a cheapie Zero Tech scope (which still adds up to a $2500ish rifle) and lay down next to a bloke with a Defiance PRS rifle with a Nightforce ATACR and all the bits and bells that punches the guts out of the target at 500yd, i would find that more demotivating than shooting a 40-something score against other 40-something scores and similar grade rifles.

Again, a sub-division of Standard/Factory and Open/Tac would help keep it a bit fairer and might help stop the possibility of an arms race.

It’s a hard one, and I’d love to hear ideas to keep it balanced.

Weairy wrote:

Mick_762 wrote:Josh,
So by your "To me, this means no tac chassis rifles, "
You are ruling out the factory Tikka Tac A1.
An off the shelf, factory rifle.

An off the shelf rifle, not really designed as a practical, walk around hunting rifle. The Tikka TAC and the Lithgow LA105 are two examples of factory rifles that don’t really fit the rules as they’re written. Keep in mind, that’s my opinion and my interpretation of the rules as they’re currently written. I wouldn’t turn someone away if they came to shoot with either rifle; but if I were running a Sporting/Hunter comp, it’d be really touch and go. If the rifle was stock standard with a 12 power scope or similar, fine. But if it’s clearly a rifle that has been modded up for target shooting and pushed the rule book (rebarrel, high power scope etc) then it’s not really fitting the spirit of the class.

Again, it’s a bloody hard one to decide where to draw the line and how to maintain the heart of the class and keep it inclusive.

Yeah Josh agree that its a hard one to decide on.
My Tikka Tac A1 is a hunting rifle.




Wears a sightron 4-20x50, and is double duty spotlighting rifle too.

Very hard to decide whats a hunting rifle, and what isnt.

Very very nice.
How close to standard is it? TAC A1 off the shelf with a 20 power Sightron is fair and reasonable enough, the chassis being a toss of the coin.
Again, if it’s not modded up to slap targets, it’s within spec by the rules. If you said it’s got a Nightforce ATACR bolted on top and it’s been rebarreled in a 6BR and you’re using an Altas PRS bipod, all of which is technically within spec, that’s where the grey area is so huge.

In the above pictures:
Its bog standard INCLUDING the chassis, apart from changing the Tikka 2 stage trigger to a T3 single stage,

Burris XTR rings with 20MOA inserts and an Atlas bipod round it out

Now it wears a 6mm SLR barrel, as the only change to the above.

Not unusual to see "high end" actions on dedicated hunting rifles these days.
Not everyone wants to use a "Remchester" in .223 or .308 with an 8 power scope.

Yep, and that’s exactly why this is such a hard class to work out

All still legal but not exactly a run of the mill rifle anymore.

Even a 6SLR brings the question of allowing “wild cat” or target calibres (6BR/XC/Dasher etc). Should it be kept to calibres that the rifle was available in?

There’s so many variables, who knows the answer.

Weairy wrote:Yep, and that’s exactly why this is such a hard class to work out

There’s so many variables, who knows the answer.

Yep 100% agree with you.

So (to me) its important to get people on the mound. Support their choice of rifle and Coach them well.
They will decide if they want to go full steam into Target shooting.
The Nagambie Club is a good example of the camaraderie and fun that can be had alongside the seriousness of the Comp shooting.
Dont lose sight of that mate.

The closest NRAA range to me, I swore I would never return to as long as my arse points to the ground.

Guys,

This class is very easy, in fact its a no brainer........................... if the class settings are,

The rifle must be as produced, off the shelf. This would allow rifles with any stock that the model was produced with.

Any Caliber that a Club will allow.......for most this will be 8mm and under.

No changes of Triggers, Barrels, Calibers ect unless changed for parent manufacturer spares.
Any modifications other than replacment with factory spares and its straight in to any of the other classes that may suit.

Any sighting system.

Two legged folding bipod to support the front of the rifle.

Sandbag to support the rear of the rifle.


The current crop of mass produced rifles are extremely cheep, accurate and fun to use
Whilst we acknowledge that this class is not designed to compete with F/S,F/O, F/TR, we will time to time see performances that will bring tears to the eyes of those that shoot these classes.

Mick