New Sporter Class SSRs

[Weairy]

Congratulations to all involved in updating the Sporter Class rules. The changes are fair and reasonable, RO friendly and not outrageously restrictive or impactful on existing class shooters.

Well done!

[Valk]

https://nraa.com.au/wp-content/uploads/ ... urrent.pdf

[Sako85]

Hopefully they are adopted Nation wide to allow interstate competitions with the same gear and individual states not having own twist (kinda the purpose of SSR’s ) - question remains though which class will be utilised for comps such as OPM’s and Kings as I doubt both will be -

Atleast the rules now seem to be well defined and shooters can’t “manipulate/interpret” to suit their equipment and have clear guidelines - just have to remember to take Rearbag to scrutineering for weighing as well as rifle - not sure bag weight was required but happy to abide

[Weairy]

Hopefully they are adopted Nation wide to allow interstate competitions with the same gear and individual states not having own twist (kinda the purpose of SSR’s ) - question remains though which class will be utilised for comps such as OPM’s and Kings as I doubt both will be -

Atleast the rules now seem to be well defined and shooters can’t “manipulate/interpret” to suit their equipment and have clear guidelines - just have to remember to take Rearbag to scrutineering for weighing as well as rifle - not sure bag weight was required but happy to abide

States (NSW) were only using their own rules because the SSRs were quite vague in a lot of points (particularly stocks). There’s no need to do that now - we’ve got a clean cut set of rules which caters much better than before.
Rear bag rule is a fair copy/paste of the PSR rules (C24). It’s a good idea, there are a lot of bigger PRS style bags that shouldn’t really fall into this class. I would’ve liked to see it go one step further and add dimensions like the PSR rules. Scrutineering it is pretty simple, can near be done without the scales. If you fill a normal-sized rear bar with anything other than poly pellets (sand/garnet for instance), it’ll be well over weight and that’ll be evident.

I would think Open class would be the only one to run at Kings level (in my opinion) - I also think Tr/C shouldn’t be at Kings level anymore, but that’s a different argument (let’s not get into that one lol)

[Matt P]

If I was to put add SH to a OPM the way the current rules are written I would put Open Class on as any Production class rifle would comply with the Open Class rules and would be the best way to get good attendance. So my question is why have Production class ??

[Weairy]

If I was to put add SH to a OPM the way the current rules are written I would put Open Class on as any Production class rifle would comply with the Open Class rules and would be the best way to get good attendance. So my question is why have Production class ??

To give a split between the likes of myself with a setup rifle and experience, and average Joe the newcomer with a $1200 Howa. A and B grade system would work much the same; why do we still have TR/C and support it at a Kings? Similar rational.

[RMc]

Most clubs would not be able to add two new classes to their OPMs with the current number of SH shooters.
If the majority of weekly shooters were PC class then I would vote for it as the idea is to bring more hunters into our competitions.
PCO shooters could enter FO, we would have the argument that they are not competitive but is the same with PC against PCO.

Richard

[macguru]

Sounds like, if you just wear out the barrel and re-barrel, or go further and change the stock or calibre, it becomes PCO.

[Weairy]

Sounds like, if you just wear out the barrel and re-barrel, or go further and change the stock or calibre, it becomes PCO.

Stocks aren’t restricted in either class.

It’s really a rebarrel or weight that defines PC vs PCO. By the time you flog out a factory barrel at 800-1200 rounds, you’ll have a fair indication if you want to play Open or sell your factory rifle and buy another (cheaper changeover than a rebarrel in a lot of cases).

[Weairy]

Most clubs would not be able to add two new classes to their OPMs with the current number of SH shooters.
If the majority of weekly shooters were PC class then I would vote for it as the idea is to bring more hunters into our competitions.
PCO shooters could enter FO, we would have the argument that they are not competitive but is the same with PC against PCO.

Richard

That might be the case for a while, but keep in mind, the class is growing rapidly and these rules will cater for years to come. It might be a case of just running PCO at OPMs for a little while, but that could all change in 12 months too. We’ve had 8 new members join in the past two months, every one of them is S-Class.

[macguru]

So.. my 308 is PCO (rebarrelled), and my 6.5 PRC is PC (factory tikka) both under 6.5kg. A bit of a surprise but not a problem. I imagine they will just offer PCO in competitions anyways. We have 2 categories on the hexta system at our range already

The scope power setting is a bit low but not unreasonable considering the intent of the class.

[Weairy]

So.. my 308 is PCO (rebarrelled), and my 6.5 PRC is PC (factory tikka) both under 6.5kg. A bit of a surprise but not a problem. I imagine they will just offer PCO in competitions anyways. We have 2 categories on the hexta system at our range already

The scope power setting is a bit low but not unreasonable considering the intent of the class.

You’ll be surprised, a 24x scope is good enough for 1000yd, you just need to use the reticle and centre. But that’s why we’re on TR scoring too.

[PeteFox]

I have two problems with the new rules.

Magazine fire and muzzle brakes have no place in slow fire competition.
Muzzle brakes are intended to enable the shooter to see the fall of shot - we have markers and ETs for that - without all the obnoxious muzzle blast.
and
Magazine fire is an unnecessary added safety risk in slow fire. It adds no benefit and creates two extra things to check (with a 10 shot mag) .

A question.
Barrel length is limited to 27" in SCO if it is a modified but otherwise conforming SC rifle. but what if the rifle is purchased from factory with a barrel longer than 27" ? I can see a loophole developing here already. for as long as it is a production shop bought rifle, it is "any rifle" - see 23.4

Pete

[macguru]

"You’ll be surprised, a 24x scope is good enough for 1000yd, you just need to use the reticle and centre. But that’s why we’re on TR scoring too."

agreed, one of my scopes is 32x but at the kings i was winding it back with no problems. At least now I know what to buy for another scope. 25x nightforce or vortex.

As for the magazine rules, I would think local range rules about single load only during competitions could be selectively applied where necessary.

[Drop shot]

"I have two problems with the new rules.

Magazine fire and muzzle brakes have no place in slow fire competition.
Muzzle brakes are intended to enable the shooter to see the fall of shot - we have markers and ETs for that - without all the obnoxious muzzle blast.
and
Magazine fire is an unnecessary added safety risk in slow fire. It adds no benefit and creates two extra things to check (with a 10 shot mag)"

The responses to brakes are a little disproportionate - thankfully the new rules have allowed their continued use.

Banning brakes is more of a detriment to our sport than allowing them. We will be bringing in an entirely new cohort of shooters.

As a collective, we need to be cognisant of a few things;
The Sporting Rifle class is the fastest growing discipline in F-Class as it is able to be shot with entry level equipment and offers “practical” shooting in the form of competing with a field appropriate rifle, in a field firing position (prone, bipod, rear bag)

Rifles and their associated equipment are expensive. People will be using 1 rifle across as many disciplines or end uses as they can. We should be aiming to facilitate this. A hunting rifle with a few mods can now come and shoot Sporting Rifle, opening up F-Class to them, bringing in more members, then that same rifle can now be pressed into PSR.

In this way, we are establishing a network and linking in the different disciplines with each other. The more shooting opportunities we can offer members, the absolute better for our membership growth, and support to shooters.

We are already seeing the benefits of Sporting Rifle with our new members. F-Class Sporting Rifle helps build a strong foundation and train fundamentals and wind calling with the Electronic Targets providing instant feedback to shooter/line coach
.
To establish strong neural pathways and maximise the benefits of the reps that members are getting with their rifle, the rifle needs to be unchanged from how it is typically shot. Braked or otherwise.

I don’t mean any disrespect or criticism in the following, but it’s something we need to fully be aware of;
A rifle that has been zero’d with a brake, will have a POI that differs from the POI the rifle will have when the brake is removed. It is not a simple solution to “just remove the brake” for F-Class. The brake needs to be removed, the rifle rezerod, then the brake re-installed and the rifle rezero’d again.

All current doctrine and precision shooting training including a lot of quick math for wind and drop, is based off a 100m Zero. Most NRAA ranges don't have 100m mounds.

If we tell people to change their rifle in a way that necessitates a rezero, then we don’t offer them the time/place to zero their rifle, they simply won’t be bothered with the discipline and go do something else that’s lower drag.

This stops inclusion and growth.

Banning something isn’t the solution.
Ignoring member concerns about blast isn’t the solution.
The conversation needs to be had around how do we protect non Sporting Rifle members from the negative results of brakes, whilst allowing new members to press their competition/hunting rifle into F-Class to grow membership and make better shooters?
The use of baffles is one quick and easy way to do this.

The last aspect to the discussion around brakes requires a little bit of maturity and acceptance;
Brakes are permitted in the SSRs for Sporting Rifle discipline. There are caveats added to this around the range template/SDA. IF the range template, for whatever reason, disallows the use of brakes due to how the document is written and authorised by state Police/LRD, then brakes are not permitted on that range. IF however, brakes are banned because of individual preference of certain members, then this needs to stop.

An individual who reads the SSRs buys or builds a rifle in line with those SSRs, arrives at a range only to be told they can't shoot because of an opinion, is very quickly going to become a former member.

The new SSRs are out, you don't have to like them, but it is written and published and is now formalised.

Rather than obsessing over what we personally like and don't like, lets focus on how we include shooters and their rifles, and exclude the negatives that they may draw in.

FWIW, my Sporting rifle doesn't have a brake. Neither does my PSR rifle. I don't like them. When i do use brakes, they are 90° ported which is less effective but directs blast entirely laterally instead of rearwards at a 33° like a terminator or an APA lil' bastard because i don't like being hit with the blast, but if the world ran on what I liked and didn't like, Tasmania would have a big fence around it, everyone who doesn't know how to use their indicator is banished to it, bourbon is a breakfast food and our national anthem is Katy Perry's "California Girls" film Clip on mute. But thats not the world we live in.

Re- magazines – Mag off, visual, manual, visual, clear, clear, clear. Super easy lid.