• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

F T/R Competition Dividing F T/R into 2 divisions? Opinions?

I might disagree on the cost a bit. You can build a top of the line rifle for under $2000 as long as you don't need a designer gunsmith's name on it.

You can get a Nightforce 12-42 used for another $1200

$250 for a bipod, and you are set.

Compared to Service Rifle, to be serious, you need Just shy of $1000 in your upper, another $300 for the lower, +250 for a trigger. Rifle cost is comperable, now you get to buy a coat, that's gonna run you $450 or more unless you start with something used.

223 is cheaper to shoot than 308



As for all the what works? JBM is a blessing and a curse. Bullets make a difference, but only between people of the same skill level, a beginner with 200 Hybrids is not going to outshoot a good shooter using 175SMKs. That is the problem with the internet, People think they have to weigh brass, turn necks and shoot the same bullet that the winners are shooting, but none of that will keep your bullet out of the 8 ring if you don't call the wind, it will just hit on the waterline.
 
I still don't see the point of shooting the miniature F-class targets with "field" rifles. When the NRA sanctioned the one quarter targets, these targets where commensurate with the equipment that would likely be fielded for the next multiple years or decades. I simply do not see F-TR shooters being able to clean targets at will; ever. I don't see it being possible for F-Open either, but since I don't shoot F-Open and probably never will, I don't want to make such a pronouncement.

Forcing these one quarter targets on the "field" shooters will only engender resentment and grumbling, especially if they compare their results with F-TR or worse still, F-Open.

Denys, the NorCal Precision club shooters had "field days" and an ego boost shooting on the standard High Power targets when they first were squadded.
I believe they actually appreciated the change to the F-Class target for competition's sake (as did the Slingers who had a bit of scorn for their high scores).
Most are shooting go- fast 6.5s or 7mms with 22-25 power glass, making the standard target not much of a challenge (their normal target is roughly 19"x 30" that is shot from 300 to 1,000 yards) - we just squad the brakes on one end of the firing line.

It's a lot of fun in the pits when you have Slingers, F'ers and Tacticals to talk shooting with.

BTW, "cleans" are fairly common in Open for the match winners, depending in the COF. It's a great feeling to shoot one.
 
BTW, "cleans" are fairly common in Open for the match winners, depending in the COF. It's a great feeling to shoot one.

Wow, you guys must be really good. To me fairly common is about 20-25%.

Just going over the 2013 FCNC results, I counted about 40 15-shot cleans and 3 20-shot cleans in F-Open over 8 matches; 6 matches of 15 and 2 matches of 20. With over 200 competitors, that translates to over 1600 scores and 43 cleans represent about 2.7%.

On the F-TR side, I counted 3 15-shot cleans and 1 20-shot clean. There were just under 200 competitors, let's call it 1520 scores and these 4 cleans represent 0.2%.

I would call 2.7% rare and 0.2% very rare.
 
I know what you're saying, but there is of course a longstanding connection between civilian high power and the military. You can see it more closely in XTC service rifle matches, which have a vaguely military feel and in the very existence of the CMP. I don't see why that shouldn't carry over to F class. Now that shooting a scoped rifle off of a bipod is a genuine military skill rather than a rare oddity, it makes sense to allow for the equivalent to a "service rifle" class in F class. Maybe not so strict, since scoped "sniper" rifles used in the military seem to change quite a bit, but I think it would be good to work the same spirit in somehow.

But as many have said, F T/R is more of a parallel with Palma on the sling side than it is with service rifles. There is no service rifle equivalent in F class, and I think it would be nice to see one just to keep the connection with the military alive. The concept of the CMP/DCM is a good one that we should cherish.

I believe that there is a valid point here. At my last match, I saw a competitor using an M1A with irons on a bipod. A good point to look at is how many"retired" service rifle shooters are there out there that have retired from shooting for other than vision impairment reasons? The more connections we can maintain in the shooting fraternity, the better it is for our shooting longevity.

Additionally, for many people, their first taste for high power is coming from CMP matches.
 
I'm puzzled by the us vs them attitude that so often surrounds sling shooting and F class. I will shoot as much of both as I can possible cram into my schedule and budget. Mid range sling. F class. XTC Service rifle. I'll do it all happily. F class attracts a lot of new shooters who might enjoy sling shooting. Service rifle XTC shooters might enjoy F class. The more crossover there is the better, as far as I'm concerned. It's not a zero sum game.
 
Concerning service rifles in F class and classifications.

Classifications are, and always will be, the transitioning steps for the shooter to evolve from neophyte to experienced rifleman. Competitive riflery should not be like most current public education where you walk on eggs to avoid bruising one's self esteem and reward every one for just taking a breath! If anything, we should strive to get more people in the marksman class to allow the neophyte shooter the opportunity to"win" the occasional match instead of seeing the rookie shooting In a class that finds itself vying with sharpshooters, experts, and masters because there aren't enough competitors to make a class.

About the service rifles ... that (in part) is why I suggested the question about F iron and F glass. If a service rifle can be fitted with a bipod, it can fit in here. Personally, I would love to be able to use my M1MkII, or my M1A (NM) or my AR15 in F class, that way I get use of my rifles. Yes, both the M1A an AR can be fitted with a scope, the MkII can't. I think most of you will agree, there is a difference between shooting irons vs glass. Shooting glass for a person brought up shooting irons can be very distracting. Service rifle shooters learn to read the wind quite well with the spotting scope. While the glass shooter holds off to correct for wind with a constant view of mirage, the service rifle shooter either chases his last shot or adjusts for changes as viewed from a quick glimpse of the spotting scope.

The likelihood of a service rifle shooting better than half MOA groups is right up there with the typical male giving birth. By my choice, I am shooting an AR platform match rifle for midrange F class, and potentially long range F class (using glass). I know against many of the F class shooters I may be handicapping myself. I am not looking for a crutch when it comes to scoring. But it would seem appropriate to pit rifles by commonality, so they can be equally handicapped. By offering an F class iron division, you can place iron sighted service rifles with iron sighted match rifles and iron sighted palma rifles, while the F class as currently fired stays unadulterated.
 
I'm puzzled by the us vs them attitude that so often surrounds sling shooting and F class. I will shoot as much of both as I can possible cram into my schedule and budget. Mid range sling. F class. XTC Service rifle. I'll do it all happily. F class attracts a lot of new shooters who might enjoy sling shooting. Service rifle XTC shooters might enjoy F class. The more crossover there is the better, as far as I'm concerned. It's not a zero sum game.

I have to agree. If this were a physical possibility for me, I would. Honestly, I can see F class being a great starting point for the neophyte rifleman. It is a great way to get started with minimal cash outlay. I can envision the neophyte being able to start for less than $800 with a varmint rifle, scope and bipod. It is a lot less than a tuned service rifle or a dedicated bolt action match rifle. I can see my children starting high power this way. The more varieties of our sport that we can expose the neophyte to the better. No one category of shooting is better than another. We have to impart that.
 
In my personal opinion concerning the current two divisions, the F/TR class should be limited to the use of any folding bipod underneath a .223 or .308. If you have any sort of fixed bipod, step on up to F/Open.

If those above two avenues of thought are frowned upon by the majority of F-class shooters, then maybe create a 3rd division underneath the current F/TR division. Maybe a tactical division with barrel length limited to 26", and no fixed bipods. This would give even the newer shooters wanting to test the waters in F-class a place to feel competitive with what they may already own which would keep entry costs down and attract more shooters to the sport.
 
Concerning service rifles in F class and classifications.

But it would seem appropriate to pit rifles by commonality, so they can be equally handicapped. By offering an F class iron division, you can place iron sighted service rifles with iron sighted match rifles and iron sighted palma rifles, while the F class as currently fired stays unadulterated.

Am I correct in understanding that your putative F-Iron would be shooting on the 2 MOA targets and not the F-class targets? If that's the case why even call it F- anything?
 
In my personal opinion concerning the current two divisions, the F/TR class should be limited to the use of any folding bipod underneath a .223 or .308. If you have any sort of fixed bipod, step on up to F/Open.

I would venture to say that within 3 months of the start of this silly change in the rules highly sophisticated folding bipods, far superior to the Harris-style would be available; they would just cost more than the non-folding ones? Or maybe you think you could write a rule in a way as to force everyone to use the same junk?

If those above two avenues of thought are frowned upon by the majority of F-class shooters, then maybe create a 3rd division underneath the current F/TR division. Maybe a tactical division with barrel length limited to 26", and no fixed bipods. This would give even the newer shooters wanting to test the waters in F-class a place to feel competitive with what they may already own which would keep entry costs down and attract more shooters to the sport.

So, I could get a 26 inch barrel to replace my 32 inch barrel and my fancy F-TR rifle would now be a "tactical" rifle? I would bet people would still scream that my F-TR rifle is so much better than their old Betsy. I can tell you that 26 inch rifles are not handicapped inside 600 yards and 26 inches is probably not what I would call "tactical". If you force people to use shorter barrels, they just increase the powder load to try to make up for it and that creates dangerous situations in my opinion. I lie to use a long barrel and let it push the bullet for me as I stay with a sane load.

Also, the NRA does not differentiate between F-TR and F-Open for classification purposes, that would mean your tactical guys would most likely plateau in Marksman or Sharpshooter. Do you think that's a good idea, or are you just intent on getting medals to every new shooter just for showing up?

People seem to forget that part of the attraction to being competitive in F-class is that it's demanding and difficult. It's not something that you achieve in just a few matches; it's a journey.

As the LR match director at my club, I get to meet all new shooters, either by email or telephone before a match or when they show up at a match. I usually explain to them that it's difficult and they are liable to get their egos bruised. I don't say it quite in those words, but that's the gist of it. For some reason, most everyone thinks they are naturally great shots and they have rifles that shoot subMOA to any distance, all day long, because they always do their part. Then their self-image collides with reality and many do not survive the crash to return.

I am not a naturally great shot; I have to work very hard to get decent scores and I don't see why others should have it made easier for them by lowering the standards. I just don't get that. I would think someone who wants to succeed in this discipline would take the steps required and be serious about it; how else could they take pride in their accomplishment?
 
Being this thread is about tossing around ideas that may encourage more shooters into F-Class, my suggestion of a 3rd division technologically under the current F/TR division may provide an avenue of competition outside of just playing in an equipment race $$$.
 
Any new class would have to be as different from TR as TR is from Open - that is a large gap in capability. It would also have to be something that a significant group of *experienced* f class shooters wanted to shoot. Equipment classifications for beginners are pointless. Beginners by definition are not very good. No way to change that. That's what classifications address (which are also kind of broken in F class - I've seen people shoot master scores in their first match with an Open rifle at 600 - that shouldn't happen).

I don't know if there is an appropriate 3rd class, but if there is, it looks more like "tactical/field" (say, 20x scope limit, folding bipod, < 12 pounds, .308/.223 only) than it does "ol' bessy". Ol' Bessy isn't going to win anyone anything ever so it's pointless to try to make it so. It's important to note that the point is not about making it easy for new shooters - it's to make it more appealing to experienced shooters.
 
Being this thread is about tossing around ideas that may encourage more shooters into F-Class, my suggestion of a 3rd division technologically under the current F/TR division may provide an avenue of competition outside of just playing in an equipment race $$$.

First if you haven't you really need to go and read thid thread -> http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...d-precision-rifle-class-concept-approved.html

Second, I don't care if you are racing cockroaches people that want to compete will do what it takes with in the rules to win. In your class I guarantee that there would be a $350 folding bipod that would be just as much better than your Harris as my Sinclair is today. As for rifles, if I chose to compete in your proposed class and show up with my single shot Defiance action with a 26" Kreiger barrel that weighs in 1oz less than your limit are you going to be surprised?

AND I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU ARE SHOOTING IF YOU CAN'T CALL WIND YOU CAN'T WIN! People here on the interwebz who don't spend time at 1000 yards think the rifle and bullet make a difference, and it may, but only between competitors of similar skill. I shot a 600 yard match a few months ago with a 223 that the load is complete crap and will barely hold 1MOA at 300 yards. I still finished second by one point. hmmmm... I was shooting with a bunch of beginner shooters. The point isn't that I'm great (I'm not) but I am pretty good. On most days I can shoot w/i a couple of points of the guys who are really good, but compared to guys who are just starting out and just chase the spotter, all I needed was a 1MOA gun.

The point of all that is that until you have some skill your stock rifle is better than you are and you don't need to be spending money on a gun.

one last thought, I live with access to a 1000 yard range. I can practice any time I get the time. Is my spending $500 a yr on bullets in practice unfair or contributing to your arms race?
 
Concerning service rifles in F class, I would lean towards the F class target, not the 2 MOA target. I think that the service rifle shooter would most likely move up to a bolt gun by the time they start flirting with an expert card, since they could be on the verge of maxing out the known accuracy potential of a service rifle within known accurizing technology.

Considering that F T/R is F Target/Rifle and not F Palma, and barrel length is not addressed in the rule books, that helps offset the research and knowledge of the rifleman. I know from experience that a 32" barrel will have a greater advantage over my 26" barrels, and a much greater advantage over a 20" tactical style barrel. That is part of the competitors' decision making.

I freely admit I may be reflecting this wrong, but the defined Palma rifle with 30"+ barrel shooting 155 gr HPBTs has been its own unique critter for maybe 20 years, but the match rifle has been around almost as long as the service rifle division. Rightly or wrongly, it is technically easier to transition a match rifle for F class competition than it is a service rifle. One thing we all need to remember is that we rarely go purchase a winning rifle off the rack, we evolve our rifles into the precise instruments that can win over time as a result of our practical experience and ideas.
 
F-Class started with Palma rifles being shot with scopes and bipods. This just keeps going and going in circles. If guys want to compete, they will find a way to do it. I can tell you right now, that if someone won't compete unless the rules are changed for them, they will never compete. Not because the rules won't change, but because they really don't want to compete in the first place, they just want to talk about it. There are tons of disciplines for people to try. Pick one and try it. If you don't like it, try something else.
 
F-Class started with Palma rifles being shot with scopes and bipods. This just keeps going and going in circles. If guys want to compete, they will find a way to do it. I can tell you right now, that if someone won't compete unless the rules are changed for them, they will never compete. Not because the rules won't change, but because they really don't want to compete in the first place, they just want to talk about it. There are tons of disciplines for people to try. Pick one and try it. If you don't like it, try something else.


Truer words have yet to be spoken.
 
Concerning service rifles in F class, I would lean towards the F class target, not the 2 MOA target. I think that the service rifle shooter would most likely move up to a bolt gun by the time they start flirting with an expert card, since they could be on the verge of maxing out the known accuracy potential of a service rifle within known accurizing technology.

So, let me see here. Service Rifles are already more difficult to shoot well on the 2MOA target compared to Match Rifles, and now you want to shoot them with iron sight on targets that are one quarter the size of the 2MOA targets. And you see this as a vehicle to get new shooters with "tactical" rifles involved in the sport?

This is what I call a non sequitur.
 
Content deleted, nobody gives a hoot what I think about F Class anyway.

Greg
 
Last edited:
That is not what that link says:

The origin of F class was that a Canadian TR shooter (see TR page), Mr Farquarson, wanted to carry on shooting so he added a rest and a scope and called it ‘F’ class.

This is not a beginner, this is an old guy who wanted to keep shooting

To make competitions fair, there are 3 recognized subdivisions of F Class, based
upon the rifle used. Open Class, Restricted Class and Factory Class. All F Classes shoot the same course of fire, alongside each other.
Open F-Class
This is the class with the least restriction for rifles of any caliber up to 8mm depending on range restrictions. It must not weigh more than 10kg (about 22-lb) including all attachments. Any safe, mechanically operated trigger can be used provided a safe level of sear engagement is retained.
Restricted F-Class
Exactly as for Open F Class except that only .308in/7.62mm or .223in/5.56mm caliber can be used. The overall weight of the rifle, with all attachments, must not exceed 8.25 kg including an attached bipod or 7.5kg if the bipod is not fixed on.
Factory F-Class
This class is restricted to mass-produced rifles of any calibre (like Open Class) that can be purchased readily at many gun shops and that have not been customized to improve ballistic performance. Factory Class is for people shooting ‘out-of-the-box’ rifles; Remington, Winchester, Ruger, Savage, Tikka, Browning, Sako or similar, using the original manufacturers parts. Some ‘adjustments’ are permitted, but not the replacement of parts.

That is in no way shape or form the shoot whatever you want class you describe.




Greg, in the end you are in fact pissing into the wind. I appreciate the history, but I for one am happy that the classes exist as they do today. I would not probably not be shooting otherwise. I shoot with Danny Biggs pretty regularly. I would hate to think that my 308 scores would have to compete with his 7mm scores, because the reality is that under no circumstances do I ever see me winning, and not just against Mr. Biggs. I think on one particularly bad day I did shoot w/i 4 points of him, and I was pretty darned happy with that. I do on occasion outscore some of the F-Open guns, but never all of them.

Finally, Name any competitive endeavor where money doesn't enter into the game? Whether it's sailboats, cars, bicycles, motorcycles, horses, dogs or guns. Look at smallbore. You really think a kid with an off the rack Remington can be competitive against an Anschutz?
 
Greg, who gives a hoot how the ORA interprets things. At any rate, they made up this factory class and it has no basis in history or the DCRA rules. To be honest, I don’t even see how they can enforce their rules without pulling apart each “factory” rifle and going over all these parts with a fine tooth comb. I can see doing this at big matches. Not.

The DCRA has three classes and none of them talk about “factory” rifles or “beginners”, imagine that.

Rule 11.05 (5) of their rulebook describes these 3 classes:
(a) F Class Open:
(i) Any rifle of up to 8mm calibre may be used (see also Rule 11.21), but 'rail guns' and similar devices which provide positive mechanical method(s) for returning to the precise point of aim for the prior shot are not permitted (see also Rule 11.15(2)). The rifle may, incorporate an integral or attached mechanism for raising and lowering its butt. See also Rule 11.15(2)(d). Rule 11.05(1) also applies. NB: This maximum calibre limit of 8mm applies only to Connaught Range and Primary Training Centre; calibre limits for events held at other venues may differ, so must be determined and promulgated in advance by the organizers of those events.

(ii) An 'F' Class (O) rifle's overall weight must not exceed 10kg (about 22-lb) including all attachments (such as, but not limited to, its scopesight, sling and bipod, if any). NB: an "attachment" is defined as including any external object (other than the competitor and his apparel) which recoils (or partially recoils) with the rifle, or which is clamped, magnetically or viscously held, or in any other way joined to the rifle for each shot, or which even slightly raises with the rifle when lifting the latter from its rest(s). See Rule 11.05(2).

(iii) Barrel extensions of any length may be fitted to mount the foresight or act as a counterweight.

(iv) Any safe, mechanically-operated trigger may be employed on an 'F' Class rifle.


(b) F Class “Farquharson” (F) Rifles must meet all of the above F Class (O) specifications, except that:

(i) Only ammunition that completely meets TR specifications may be used, See also rule 11.20 (2) and

(ii)The overall weight of the rifle with all attachments must not exceed 8.25kg (about 18-lb 2.4oz)


(c) FTR – An FTR Class rifle is limited to .223 Remington or .308 Winchester caliber chambers or their commercial metrification equivalents. Chamber dimensions must conform to SAAMI or CIP dimensions. Ammunition maybe commercially made or hand loaded as defined elsewhere in these rules. There is no restriction on bullet weight. The FTR rifle class is limited to the use of an attached bipod and or sling as front supports, optionally together with a rear bag, none of which provide a positive mechanical means of returning the rifle to its precise point of aim for the next shot.. The overall weight must not exceed 8.25 kg including all its attachments (such as, but m=not (sic) limited to, its sights and bipod, if any)


So, they have three classes in Canada; F-Open is pretty much as the NRA defines it except for the adjustment device attached to the butt of the rifle; F-Farquharson, same as F-Open but only shooting .223 Rem with bullet of any weight or .308 Win with bullets less than 156 grain and rifles weighing less than 8.25 kilos; and FTR, pretty much like the NRA describes it.

The F-Farquharson class is what you are advocating here Greg and frankly I don’t see the attraction for it. All three F-classes use the half-diameter F-class targets. It would be interesting to get numbers for each of the classes from DCRA.

Again, there is nothing in the DCRA rules about factory rifles or making things easy for beginners, that’s an ORA fabrication.
 
I know Denys, and admire his professionalism and skills in conducting and shooting in our club matches. I feel that I know both XTR and Greg Langelius from their eloquently worded posts on this forum.

I would submit that if I showed up with a Honda tuner car at an NHRA event, they would not bend their rules just so I could compete in their venue.
I would submit that if I showed up at a Hide tactical run and gun event that they would not bend their rules just to accommodate me with my single shot F/O rig on their timed events.
I submit that if I moved to Outer Mongolia, I would not expect that they would speak English or German to me and I would need to learn some Outer Mongolian before going there.
I would submit that if someone would like to shoot in an F Class match, that they should familiarize themselves with the rules of the game, and show up with the suitable equipment.

In the immortal words of Rodney King : Can't we all just get along ?
 
Greg, it was not my intention to debate you on this subject; my prior post was in response to the one where you introduced the interpretation of rules by the ORA as buttressing your position. Being from Canada and a prior member of the DCRA (30 years ago,) I figured it would be interesting to go to the source of these rules rather than read some yoyo’s (ORA, not you) interpretation and as I suspected they were all wet.

The DCRA rules clearly state they have a class that follows the exact specifications for which Mr. Farquharson petitioned the DCRA at the turn of the last century. They even call it F- Farquharson, a double tribute to Mr. Farquharson. I think that’s a nice gesture from the DCRA, one that is discarded by the ORA, as I am sure you have noticed. I would also state the only deviation from the original specs is that all F classes use the reduced targets whereas Mr. Farquharson was using the regular 2 MOA target.

Now to be honest with you, try as I may, I have no clue what your views are on this except for the oft-repeated fact that you do not like the current setup and blame the NRA, the current aficionados of F class, the Coca Cola Company and the folks who drink coffee for what F class has become, in your view. The one thing I have failed to grasp is simply this; do you even know whiskey tango foxtrot what want? If you do, could you please help me out and post it here in plain English?

You see, I don’t get most innuendoes or quadruple negatives or sentences like this one you wrote earlier:
I'm done with this, and if anyone thinks my future views will not reflect the outcome of this topic and my reception is dreaming. Too bad the ones this will probably affect most are not the ones double-teaming me here from the start.

When my attitude starts to suck, remember this thread. I give as I get, and I'm no longer so quick to be scrupulously reasonable, always helpful, or turn another cheek. Some days I prefer the company of my family and cats, and I expect there will be more of those days than has been the average to come.

What the hell does that even mean? What are you saying here? Could you please cut out the double talk and the gobbledy gook and get to a point, any point?
 
Denys, years ago just prior to the NRA sanctioning F-Class there was a discussion on the proposed rules that would govern F-TR. One of the posters had jumped the gun and had a .260 bolt gun built specifically to compete in F-TR. Said poster politiced heavily in support of allowing cartridges additional to the .308 Win & .223 Rem. The majority were for limiting the cartridges to the .308 & .223. So the pro-.260 poster got his shorts in a knot and vowed that he'd never participate in another F-Class match again.

IIRC, and if I'm wrong my apologies to Greg.
 
Well Greg, your disdain for F-Class has been noted in the past. In order for Denys to better understand your position your history comes into play.
 
Yes, Al, it does; and I apologize for my part in stirring this pot on Thanksgiving morning. I can tell you for sure these last derisive posts from the others were something truly special to wake up to on a Thanksgiving morning. They are a kindness of unusual proportion.

I also tell you that it really cuts against my grain to play the selfish card; but after all this decades-plus time's worth of slogging through the innocent questions despite frequent opposition and derision, something breaks inside. You try being nice, and you still get a shit sandwich, with a side of smirk.

Right now I am not in a Thanksgiving mood. Hope everybody else here is doing considerably better.

Greg
 
Last edited:
Well, I don't know what you mean by smirk or shit sandwich from others, so it must be your interpretation because I don't see it. I also want to come the defense of my friend Paul (pjparker,) with regards to your long unwarranted and actually downright nasty attack on him. Paul is a true gentle man, one of the nicest person you would ever meet and while he likes to tease a little, he never has an unkind word to say about anyone and I am thankful to know him and call him friend. There was no acrimony whatsoever in his post, he was just trying to exemplify how he views your arguments against F-class as it is currently constituted.

I had detected in the past your propensity towards anything to do with F-class but could never understand exactly WHAT your beef was about because you always skated around the issue or just made tangential references to something in the past. Even now, after I asked you directly to enlighten me, and many others here, you avoided doing so. Al posted something that made your motives look small and self-centered and you have not chosen to refute it, so I really have no choice but to believe that what Al has reluctantly posted is the truth.

I am disappointed.

And I am also miffed that you tried to use your incorrect understanding of the original intent of F-class as Mr. Farquharson proposed it to the DCRA in pushing, nay, imposing your point of view on others. I would not be surprised to find out that you used the same tactic to get your way with the little group you shoot with in your neck of the woods; the one that makes up its own rules and thus deprives any of its participants from gaining an NRA classification or establishing any records.

I am very disappointed in you.

And please stop attacking my friends.
 
content deleted. Mike, of course, you are right.

Al, I tried explaining one more time. We can all see how well that went.

Greg
 
Last edited:
So, let me see here. Service Rifles are already more difficult to shoot well on the 2MOA target compared to Match Rifles, and now you want to shoot them with iron sight on targets that are one quarter the size of the 2MOA targets. And you see this as a vehicle to get new shooters with "tactical" rifles involved in the sport?

This is what I call a non sequitur.

No! That is being viewed a bit out of context.

I am looking at the guy that is much like Greg or myself, the long time shooter that due to circumstances beyond their control that can no longer shoot the course of fire that they have shot for ages and already have the appropriate equipment. Many of you seem to address this relatively nonchalantly.

The gentleman that is the father of F class was motivated by waning vision. I wish I were that lucky. At the time I was victimized by a negligent driver, an XTC rifleman still started the rapid fire stages from the standing position. Due to the damage inflicted on my legs and the fact that I addressed this from the safety perspective, the NRA protest committee issued me a permanent authorization to start rapid fire from either prone or sitting, which is the current practice. That authorization was relatively easy to obtain. After trying to shoot XTC and midrange prone for 2 years, I succumbed (eventually) to the realization that I couldn't shoot sling any more, due to the arm injuries. I petitioned for authorization to use a monopod for standing since the tendon that provides strength snapped and couldn't be surgically restored, but that petition was denied because the committee felt I would have an unfair advantage. I was now removed from XTC matches due to physical disability and left with 3 options with a number of match tuned service rifles ... either shoot conventional prone (sling) and risk use of my arm, or shoot F class, or give up shooting.

Realistically, the Garand is not readily adapted to either F Open or F T/R. The M1A/M14 can mount a scope, but making it close to a 1/2 MOA rifle may not be financially viable. The AR15 can be the most viable, but better with an A3/A4 upper. Again, realistically, unless the newly challenged rifleman is independently wealthy, they can't run out and buy an appropriate rifle, and we all know there is a market demand for match grade rifles that will come close to returning the investment cost. Unlike a match rifle, the service rifle doesn't lend itself readily to F class competition. I am not looking for pity here, but in my instance, the accident that left me disabled realistically cost me my ability to do the job I held for 26 years and left me with $1.4 million in injuries and medical expenses. One of the important things I have learned after my accident is flexibility, characterized by my current mantra: improvise, adapt, and overcome.

I am looking to see how we can adapt an existing discipline that can be inviting to either the experienced or curious rifleman. One of the nice things I like to tout about competitive shooting is that it is one of the few sports that a disabled athlete can compete in with non disabled athletes on an equal par. Try to look at it from my perspective before you jump on this to maintain the current purity of F class and feel as if I am trying to garner a medal for everyone that shows up and just breathes. Look at what you have invested in a "pre-F class" competition rifle over a lifetime/long time in the game. Then think about what you would do if you woke up one morning with near total loss of 2 or more limbs, but still able to to squeeze the trigger with the burning desire to continue in the sport that has been a major portion of your life?
 
First off I want to start by saying, I have not read all of this, nor do I know with any accuracy what was posted and has now been removed.

However I would like to put a bit of context into Greg's issue,

Understand, Sniper's Hide organized the trip to Raton to attend the Spirit of America Match. Greg was a big part of this, and we did have rifles built for us that were more of a cross over than a traditional F Class rifle. I approached Savage when they were phasing out the 260REM 10FP. This was around 2001, give or take a year. They sold us the rifles for $250 each. McMillan built us the very first Savage inletted A5 stocks, we had aftermarket Lothar Walther barrels, Sharpshooter Supply triggers and we did these rifles from the ground up. In all, it was a group event with Danny Shumway (he was like 15 y.o. if that doing load develop) , Andy Kmussack, another junior shooter, as well as many others. It was a Family Event... Dads bringing their Sons to the event, Greg, Myself, and a few others all working together.

When we got there we were greeted by a lot of hostility from the Palma Shooters, but the F Class Team was really no better. None of us were very accomplished, we had moments, but we certainly were not lighting the range on fire. Some guys were nice, but really, the majority was very elitist and would rather we stayed out of their pond. There were a lot of heavy weights in the F Class world there and quite honestly they were not helpful, very stand offish , and having a meaningful conversation was hard. This was deflating to guys who made this trip from NY to NM... consider the conversations prior to showing up, how much fun the boys would have, only to have a guy walk up the first morning call everyone including the 2 boys "Fuck Heads" it might have been in jest but it did not come off that way.

It's safe to say, it left a very long lasting negative impression. Me, i can careless, I made a joke of the whole thing, and was never quite sweating it. I honestly like to compete but I am not hyper competitive. Heck I was hours late because I was dating my wife at the time and rather lay in bed then show up. Clearly my priorities were not the same as some the guys on the line, going for a slot on the Team.

I think Greg took it the worst because it was a very special trip. He cannot travel across the country at the drop of a dime. So the disappointment was especially tough. It was a long time ago, and I know things have changed a lot. We tried explaining to these guys that the line had more senior citizens shooting and their attitude was not gonna get the juniors to return if they continued to act like their shit didn't stink, but at the time they weren't too interested. I am sure this was not the attitude of everyone, but it was enough. Over the years I spoke to several of the F Class Team guys and they were much nicer off the range (like at SHOT) than they were that week. So I am sure it was just part of their competitive nature. However there is big difference between being a great guy after the fact and being a dick when you're on the firing line. Aside from their own coaching I saw no attempt to assist any of these new shooters. The "Look" did fit for them and I am sure they thought, "why bother".

So, while i will not defend Greg's continued bad feelings, having been there, knowing the entire story, I do understand it. At the same time you can't defend people as being "great guys" when you weren't there to hear it first person. it was not in line with the defense being put on.

Would I go back, absolutely, but I can now afford a rifle that is more in line with what F Class shooting requires.
 
PS... let me use my Suppressor on the line and I would be much more visible at these matches. :)

I get it, not every state can use them, but if it meets the weight requirement it is not adding an advantage in a 1 shot game, in fact it's just another layer for a potential error/ problem.
 
P.P.S.

The F/TR discussion was after the fact and not part of the first trip. It was not about 260 vs 308 or anything like that. There was a lot of confusion regarding tactical rifles, and things like the bipod, weight, etc. This particular time I was using an Accuracy International rifle (factory) and when they were talking about proposing the rules, a factory AI would have been over the weight limit. In this instance the conversation was again being shut down prematurely because the guys doing the talking weren't under the impression anyone else's opinion matter. That bit of hostility was again, because of the elitist attitude on display. I never paid much attention after, stopped going to F Class matches myself, so how it all played out in writing I have no idea. But they were very limiting in even the debate, even in person.

this was not about anyone building a 260 and being shut out. Switching a barrel a Savage would have been easy. They were making drop in barrels at that time.
 
Some guys were nice, but really, the majority was very elitist and would rather we stayed out of their pond. There were a lot of heavy weights in the F Class world there and quite honestly they were not helpful, very stand offish , and having a meaningful conversation was hard. This was deflating to guys who made this trip from NY to NM... consider the conversations prior to showing up, how much fun the boys would have, only to have a guy walk up the first morning call everyone including the 2 boys "Fuck Heads" it might have been in jest but it did not come off that way.

This, of course, is nonsense, and I would hope than it's rare. Makes me appreciate my local club, where we get about 30 shooters, 2/3rds of which are F TR, and half of those show up with a "tactical" rifle rather than a "target" rifle. Nobody cares, we all have fun, and a few guys shoot some pretty damn good scores. When something like shooting sports denominational differences are causing us to react to someone with negativity, it's time to take stock of some bigger things in life. Happy Thanksgiving, all! And thanks to the military members out there keeping watch while we enjoy things here at home.
 
Frank I remember the early days also, where we where treated like crap. We now out number the others and things have gotten far nicer.
I would love to see suppressors allowed. Keeps noise and blast down which is actually better for shooters next to you.

I just hate it when these threads go down hill. Those types of threads wore me out long ago
 
No! That is being viewed a bit out of context.

I am looking at the guy that is much like Greg or myself, the long time shooter that due to circumstances beyond their control that can no longer shoot the course of fire that they have shot for ages and already have the appropriate equipment. Many of you seem to address this relatively nonchalantly.

Greg has his own issues and they are in no way like yours. So let's just deal with your issues.

The gentleman that is the father of F class was motivated by waning vision. I wish I were that lucky. At the time I was victimized by a negligent driver, an XTC rifleman still started the rapid fire stages from the standing position. Due to the damage inflicted on my legs and the fact that I addressed this from the safety perspective, the NRA protest committee issued me a permanent authorization to start rapid fire from either prone or sitting, which is the current practice. That authorization was relatively easy to obtain. After trying to shoot XTC and midrange prone for 2 years, I succumbed (eventually) to the realization that I couldn't shoot sling any more, due to the arm injuries. I petitioned for authorization to use a monopod for standing since the tendon that provides strength snapped and couldn't be surgically restored, but that petition was denied because the committee felt I would have an unfair advantage. I was now removed from XTC matches due to physical disability and left with 3 options with a number of match tuned service rifles ... either shoot conventional prone (sling) and risk use of my arm, or shoot F class, or give up shooting.

Understood. I think F-class is what you want to shoot, let's see what we can come up with to adapt you for it.

Realistically, the Garand is not readily adapted to either F Open or F T/R. The M1A/M14 can mount a scope, but making it close to a 1/2 MOA rifle may not be financially viable. The AR15 can be the most viable, but better with an A3/A4 upper. Again, realistically, unless the newly challenged rifleman is independently wealthy, they can't run out and buy an appropriate rifle, and we all know there is a market demand for match grade rifles that will come close to returning the investment cost. Unlike a match rifle, the service rifle doesn't lend itself readily to F class competition. I am not looking for pity here, but in my instance, the accident that left me disabled realistically cost me my ability to do the job I held for 26 years and left me with $1.4 million in injuries and medical expenses. One of the important things I have learned after my accident is flexibility, characterized by my current mantra: improvise, adapt, and overcome.

I am looking to see how we can adapt an existing discipline that can be inviting to either the experienced or curious rifleman. One of the nice things I like to tout about competitive shooting is that it is one of the few sports that a disabled athlete can compete in with non disabled athletes on an equal par. Try to look at it from my perspective before you jump on this to maintain the current purity of F class and feel as if I am trying to garner a medal for everyone that shows up and just breathes. Look at what you have invested in a "pre-F class" competition rifle over a lifetime/long time in the game. Then think about what you would do if you woke up one morning with near total loss of 2 or more limbs, but still able to to squeeze the trigger with the burning desire to continue in the sport that has been a major portion of your life?

What you need to do is come up with a setup that is easy to shoot and competitive at the same time, and is also acceptable under the current rules. Wishing for the rules to change for you is a hopeless cause at best or one fraught with disappointment and despair and ultimate failure at worse. So let's see if we can come up with something that works now.

When I first got into F-class, I first took along my NM AR-15 that I mounted on a bipod and topped with a scope. It didn't work very well as the A2 AR-15 is not really set up for a scope. I did not want to lose all my knowledge of the AR and related ammo and so on, so I decided to morph one of my other ARs into a rifle that would work well in F-TR, unfettered by the rules of Service Rifle. It would also be relatively inexpensive and would allow me to benefit from my past experience.

So, I took one of my A4 uppers which had a free float handguard and I sent it to Krieger to have them fit a 26 inch heavy barrel chambered in their 5.56 Match setup with a 1:7.7 twist. While that was being done, I took the lower and went to town. I removed the A2 stock and fitted a Magpul PRS with a CS spring. I removed the little pistol grip, which is not very good for shooting prone and installed one of Tubb's competition grip. I installed a nice Giselle trigger and set it much lower than the regular NM 4.5 pounds. I also installed a through-the-triggerquard bolt release.

When the upper came back with its new barrel, I installed a Weaver T-36 scope with a Brownells ring and 20MOA ramp. I mounted the rifle on a Versapod bipod and a rear bag and went shooting. The rifle is extremely accurate and after a while I settled on an 80gr bullet from JLK for all distances. With this rifle, I earned a High Master card at mid-range and a Sharpshooter at Long Range. The rifle is a joy to use and requires little effort to drive well. Your left arm would have very little to do during a string, you would only use it to squeeze the bag to refine your aim. The right hand would do nothing more than load a cartridge, press the bolt release lever right next to the trigger and then squeeze the trigger. No bolt to open, no bolt to close, it's all done with your right index finger. All you need do is concentrate on your shooting, and if you have good pit service and a good scorer, you don't even need to break your cheekweld during the string. The recoil is non-existent and if you tune your ejector the brass just accumulates next to you.

With a setup like that, you can pick and chose which parts to install at your own pace and adapt to your style. I added a few more things, but essentially, what I described above was my end result with that rifle. When I found that I had plateaued at SS in Long Range with the .223 I switched over to a bolt .308, but that's a different story. I still use this AR to shoot F-class at mid range and I have fun with it.

If this is something that you would consider, I am happy to give you a detailed parts list.
 
LRR;

I think Denys is completely right about issues. While I have physical impairments, they are in no way as extensive or as serious as yours. Any other issues are off this table as of now.

I have a rifle that is in some ways quite similar to what he suggests. If you already have an appropriate lower, it can be fitted with a dedicated upper that converts the rifle into something similar to my rifle. It is the Stag 6H upper. Listing at $595, it can probably be had for less from a Local Gun Store. This exchangeable upper allows you to have both your existing upper and an F T/R-friendly one that can be swapped in short order.

Like Denys, my Stag 6 uses a bolt release that can be operated by the trigger finger. I think it's very convenient, priced nicely, and easily installed. The Stag 6 upper has a 24" heavy stainless barrel with a 1:8" twist, 5.56 NATO chamber, and handles bullets weight/lengths of up to HDY 75gr HPBT Match, and that may not be the limit. It's very accurate, and even shoots TulAmmo 55gr steelcase ammo far better than I had ever expected. Several folks here have also commented about the superb accuracy of the Stag Model 6.

Mine has a Weaver V-24 in simple Weaver See-Thru rings mounted directly to the flattop. My Granddaughter shoots it at 250yd in an F Class-like local Club COF, and loves it. I have no idea about performance at longer distances than 250yd, but I seriously doubt it would fall apart at 300 or beyond. My 250yd load uses the mentioned bullet and 23.5gr of Varget, which I believe is relatively mild, in an effort to go easier on the bore/throat. If you are planning to really reach out, I'm sure Denys can recommend reasonable upper charge weight limits.

The free-float forend already has a sling stud that is appropriate for a Harris-type bipod. The BR Model works fine for me with the 10rd magazines.

I hope this helps.

Greg
 
Last edited:
Just wanted to share my personal F-Class experience - I am a somewhat of a newbie, I've been shooting F-Class for only 3 years.

My passion is in Military Bolt Action Bench Rest - I love the sport, there are no modifications allowed to the rifles, you work with what you got - crappy triggers, horrid sights with no adjustments and questionable barrels. But you work with it, you find the load that works in THAT rifle and you work on your fundamentals that get the X-count up. Since it is at 100 yards - you don't worry about the wind.

One day the F-Class coordinator visited the MBABR match and invited everyone to shoot mid-range F-Class - all I heard bring what you got, have fun, learn to read wind.

I already had benchrest equipment and a hunting Savage in 243 - so I was in.

When I got to the match - I almost left - bunch of grumpy old men with not enough coffee. But once the match got going - things relaxed and people were helpful.

Next week I purchased Savage Target in 6BR on gunbroker for $800 and shoots exceptionally well. It is by far the easiest and most consistent shooting rifle I own.

But here is the kicker - I have "graduated" to F-TR and I have a lot MORE money tied into F-TR rig than the F-Open.

But wait, there is more, I am trying "Service" rifle - and I have EVEN MORE money in it than in FTR, and I still haven't bought the darn coat! I tried shooting without the coat and the back of my arm was blue for two weeks.

So, the way I see it - F-Open is the entry class - any rifle, any caliber, any sights, and support - you literally can show up and shoot whatever you want. F-TR gets more specialized and restrictive, then Service, and then Palma.

Maybe I am way off - but that's how I see it.
 
I think everyone should use the same caliber rifle...be more even that way....It aint fair with all the other calibers..I shoot a 223 and he has a dasher...whine whine..it aint fair to me....blah blah.....
Seriously though,I thought the replies were worth reading..Very informative..thats why I like this site so much more than others..
 
Last edited:
The great thing about F Class is it allows many of us broken down guys to still compete. I wish it had not evolved into an equipment race but like most things that get popular guys look for news ways to win. I don't think it will ever be just a test of wind reading again ( like it was when we all shot 155 Palma rifles) as now you have to have best equipment, ammo and abilities. Once everyone catches up with equipment new equipment becomes available and gives an edge to who gets newest/best equipment first. As much as this is a PIA it has driven us all to be better. I just recently changed to 220 grain Scenars because, while my scores have remained constant with 155s they where no longer competitive

Greg, keep shooting brother it is just for fun anyway.
 
F-Class started with Palma rifles being shot with scopes and bipods. This just keeps going and going in circles. If guys want to compete, they will find a way to do it. I can tell you right now, that if someone won't compete unless the rules are changed for them, they will never compete. Not because the rules won't change, but because they really don't want to compete in the first place, they just want to talk about it. There are tons of disciplines for people to try. Pick one and try it. If you don't like it, try something else.

Not sure where you were going with that or where you get all that from this post. This whole post started because someone just asked a question, and pretty sure the guy who asked it already competes.

the majority was very elitist and would rather we stayed out of their pond. There were a lot of heavy weights in the F Class world there and quite honestly they were not helpful, very stand offish , and having a meaningful conversation was hard.

Oooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhh I can totally see that...

jon-stewart-popcorn11.gif
 
Last edited:
Your contributions to this thread as well as the sport speak volumes.
 
Last edited: