Newbie Asks: Why do you say the Production (Rifle) Division is a Joke?

[kthomas]

I shoot I am never going to be the best. The person that taught me was a shooter that put in years of training, daily. He could show up at a match, pick up any gun there and win. People today want instant gratification, no work involved by them.
You want to be the best you have to put in insane amounts of time, then money.
I actually picked up a sponsor for 2 years and was able to put in more time, I am not going to be a champion. I do not have the "piece" that gets you there.
Equipment is part of the equation.
I remember many times going to the range with XXXX and someone complains their gun wasn't good enough. He would offer help then shoot their gun perfectly. Nope not the equipment.
IMO 99% of people can not outshoot the gun even a stock gun.

EDIT: thought we could go to a spec series like NASCAR or something. Everyone gets the exact same gun form one supplier. Or one gun is range supplied and everyone shoots that gun.

I agree that rarely it's the equipment holding people back. Shooting a 16lb .308 versus a 26lb 6 dasher - yeah that's going to be a decently sized disadvantage. All else equal though, a Ruger RPR isn't going to be at much of a disadvantage to a full blown custom.

If you want to win, focus on training. Be a hungry competitor.

The issue with stock rifles is there is no one size fits all. People are built different, and need different rifles as a result. Different LOP, different grips, triggers, diopter settings, etc.

 

[Rodney65]

One thing I learned as a match director and as and continue to be a competitor. The fun of shooting steel is shooting steel. Because shooting dirt is pretty much pointless as dirt is already pretty much already dead. And DEAD is the key word. Making matches challenging is fine. It does a great job of thinning out the people who are not so good, leaving the best shooters plenty of time to continue to shoot those great scores. However, it will get awful lonely at the shooting line. When those really good shooters age out and they will, sure enough, the sport is DEAD.

Problem, is, if it is made too easy, it looses its relevance. When missing is almost impossible, it is no more fun than never hitting anything.

The obvious answer is to have various stages, some hard, some easy, some very hard and some very easy. Serves all purposes. Helps the newbies actually enjoy themselves and provides the challenge that the better shooters really need. Its ok to have easy stages, and its ok to have really tough stages.

However, if the matches don't cater to all levels of shooters, eventually you are going to kill your base and without the base of new shooters coming it, the best shooters will not be numerous enough to continue to support the sport.

This is very un-popular with the really fine marksmen. But again, it's the base that makes the sport.

I have always liked the idea of varying difficulties like that. I think a good match should have a stage almost everyone can clean (maybe the timed tiebreaker) and a stage or two almost no one can clean.

The good shooters can focus on time and making every shot, the new shooters get to see what their strengths and weaknesses are.

 

[ma smith]

I agree that rarely it's the equipment holding people back.

Here's an interesting thought experiment...

Anyone want to point to a rifle that, as sold,
will balance correctly...in production class?

This is a huge mystery to me.

A PRS match rifle will outperform an LGS rifle down-range by alot more than the "mechanical accuracy" of its better barrel (typically only like .2 to .3 moa better).

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

Gap ppr

 

[Dead Eye Dick]

Here's an interesting thought experiment...

Anyone want to point to a rifle that, as sold,
will balance correctly...in production class?

This is a huge mystery to me.

A PRS match rifle will outperform an LGS rifle down-range by alot more than the "mechanical accuracy" of its better barrel (typically only like .2 to .3 moa better).

Enough said