TargetTalk

Grzegorz wrote:Let's say one, having a perfect vision, uses -5 diopter contact lens and +5 diopter lens in a rear sight. 500 years old idea :-)

Couldn't you do the exact same thing with shooting glasses + contact lens? I can't wait for the new rule to be I place, I can't stand having to deal with the damn fiddly shooting glasses.

Also if this is what I think it is (a box to insert a prescription lens and attach to your iris) then the price is comparable to shooting glasses if you have 3 for 3 positions (for faster change) and much cheaper if you just have one.
http://www.shootingequipment.de/Sights- ... Eagle.html

This will be surely useful for farsighted shooters as they are interested in having a lens far from the eye. Myope needs to have a lens as close to an eye as possible. Farsihgted shooters will benefit a new rule (if it alows to fix a lens inside the rearsight), myope - not.

jhmartin wrote:
4. Single Position Finals. The Final is increased from 20 to 24 shots. The first two 3-shot series are increased to 5-shot series. The 5-shot series have 250-second time limits. Eliminations begin after the 12th shot and continue after every two shots until the gold and silver medal winners are decided after 24 shots

I wonder if this is going to apply to Prone or is it a tacit way of saying that there aren't going to be any more Prone finals...
50 seconds a shot for the first two 5 shot strings... I don't think so.

K.

KennyB wrote:

jhmartin wrote:
4. Single Position Finals. The Final is increased from 20 to 24 shots. The first two 3-shot series are increased to 5-shot series. The 5-shot series have 250-second time limits. Eliminations begin after the 12th shot and continue after every two shots until the gold and silver medal winners are decided after 24 shots

I wonder if this is going to apply to Prone or is it a tacit way of saying that there aren't going to be any more Prone finals...
50 seconds a shot for the first two 5 shot strings... I don't think so.

K.

Don't try and read this as the end all set of wording for the rules.
Gary sent me a summary that had put together over a weekend after I asked a question .... My guess for prone (yes it will stay), but that it will increase from the 100 sec for the 3 shot series to about 150-160 sec for the 5 shot series ... but that is a guess on my part. (my bet is 150 ... an even 2-1/2 min)
(Don't know why I also PM'd you ... early in the morning I guess)

jhmartin wrote:I did not want to muddy my post above, but a takeaway here:

So nope - no side blinders

But ... you get a lens in your rear sight if you choose....

Wow - no lower limit to buttplates

Fore-end depth from 90 to 120cm ... HUGE! able to bring the rifle up higher and lower the sights ... better head up positions

They have gone from 130mm to 140mm on the area behind the grip and the buttplate ... I still HATE that as a lot (almost all???) of the older wood stocked guns ARE NO LONGER LEGAL at ISSF comps. I fully expect USA Shooting to NOT ENFORCE this rule ... it would kill the junior programs. Our 8002-S2s (wood ambi-stock) do not comply.

Single position finals change (again) ... well, win at the Tokyo Olympics and you automatically get an "OR" after your score!

Neither do our Walther LG300 jr or Anschutz 8001 woodstock rifles.

randy1952 wrote:Neither do our Walther LG300 jr or Anschutz 8001 woodstock rifles.

Well Randy ... since none were in the finals of the Olympics or only one in the Finals at the JR events in Suhl, it sure does not matter does it?

Maybe when USA Shooting finally adopts that rule we can donate all our wood stocked rifles to 3-P air programs and take the tax deductions ... and close our JR clubs down

Invest in a $159 bench top belt sander and a good supply of 80 grit belts! Maybe not the best solution, but better than scrapping perfectly good airguns.

rmarsh wrote:Invest in a $159 bench top belt sander and a good supply of 80 grit belts! Maybe not the best solution, but better than scrapping perfectly good airguns.

Great joke since the amount needed to be sanded would virtually make the the rifle unusable.

jhmartin wrote:

randy1952 wrote:Neither do our Walther LG300 jr or Anschutz 8001 woodstock rifles.

Well Randy ... since none were in the finals of the Olympics or only one in the Finals at the JR events in Suhl, it sure does not matter does it?

Maybe when USA Shooting finally adopts that rule we can donate all our wood stocked rifles to 3-P air programs and take the tax deductions ... and close our JR clubs down

Would they even care if we shut our doors? The only response that I hear from some in these shooting organizations is that it is not our problem.

It could be done to most stocks with a bandsaw and a replacement metal butt plate, but what butchery.

TenMetrePeter wrote:It could be done to most stocks with a bandsaw and a replacement metal butt plate, but what butchery.

NOT TRUE ... if you cut at the 140mm line most stocks will not have the strength to stay in 1 piece or will be in 2 pieces. And there are stocks where part of the buttplate attachment are at or below that 140mm line.
You'll be having to screw/bolt on plates or drill & run bolts internally on those that "seem" to be in 1 piece for strength. That grip to rear of the stock area is one of the areas where we see stocks cracking even now. To take away material is to weaken it further.

Remember this rule requires ANYTHING behind the grip to the BUTTPLATE (not the buttplate attachment) be clear below 140mm of the CL of the bore.

I suspect that they were "gracious" enough to go from 130 to 140mm as even some new (Walther Expert and Anatomic as 2 examples) stocks did not meet 130mm.
The two above >>>>just<<<<< make 140, I think when I (roughly) measured them, the Expert was 136mm and the Anatomic was 138mm.

AND!!! For those of you with a metal stock who think you are perfectly fine ...... A 2002CA with a metal stock:



Missed it by a whole 20mm! How can you cut that at 140?

(And yeah ... ignore the taped on weights.......)

jhmartin wrote:

TenMetrePeter wrote:It could be done to most stocks with a bandsaw and a replacement metal butt plate, but what butchery.

NOT TRUE ... if you cut at the 140mm line most stocks will not have the strength to stay in 1 piece or will be in 2 pieces. And there are stocks where part of the buttplate attachment are at or below that 140mm line.
You'll be having to screw/bolt on plates or drill & run bolts internally on those that "seem" to be in 1 piece for strength. That grip to rear of the stock area is one of the areas where we see stocks cracking even now. To take away material is to weaken it further.

Remember this rule requires ANYTHING behind the grip to the BUTTPLATE (not the buttplate attachment) be clear below 140mm of the CL of the bore.

I suspect that they were "gracious" enough to go from 130 to 140mm as even some new (Walther Expert and Anatomic as 2 examples) stocks did not meet 130mm.
The two above >>>>just<<<<< make 140, I think when I (roughly) measured them, the Expert was 136mm and the Anatomic was 138mm.

AND!!! For those of you with a metal stock who think you are perfectly fine ...... A 2002CA with a metal stock:



Missed it by a whole 20mm! How can you cut that at 140?

(And yeah ... ignore the taped on weights.......)

My point exactly, my FWB 700 was on the border line depending on where you put the measuring tape on whether the metal stock would pass. I know why they passed the rule, but most of the competitors aren't a bottomless pit of money. I also realize that these rule makers are know different then the politicians who run Washington DC. They make a constant stream of regulations to justify there jobs.

jhmartin wrote:

TenMetrePeter wrote:It could be done to most stocks with a bandsaw and a replacement metal butt plate, but what butchery.

NOT TRUE ... if you cut at the 140mm line most stocks will not have the strength ....

depends how good you are at metal and woodworking. I didnt suggest just cutting at the 140 line. We need to agree to disagree on that. I hope we agree that butchering a walnut stock would be sacrilege where club level shooting might mistakenly adopt ISSF rules per se.

Grzegorz wrote:This will be surely useful for farsighted shooters as they are interested in having a lens far from the eye. Myope needs to have a lens as close to an eye as possible. Farsihgted shooters will benefit a new rule (if it alows to fix a lens inside the rearsight), myope - not.

How about using one of these:
http://www.intershoot.co.uk/acatalog/mecmonocle.jpg

http://www.intershoot.co.uk/acatalog/mecmonocleduo.jpg


Can bring that as close to your eye as you want.

TenMetrePeter wrote:

jhmartin wrote:

TenMetrePeter wrote:It could be done to most stocks with a bandsaw and a replacement metal butt plate, but what butchery.

NOT TRUE ... if you cut at the 140mm line most stocks will not have the strength ....

depends how good you are at metal and woodworking. I didnt suggest just cutting at the 140 line. We need to agree to disagree on that. I hope we agree that butchering a walnut stock would be sacrilege where club level shooting might mistakenly adopt ISSF rules per se.

Wbat xo we disagree on?
You ca not cut that stock at the 140 line

jhmartin wrote: Wbat xo we disagree on?
You ca not cut that stock at the 140 line

I honestly cannot answer that confidently.

I was talking about most wooden air rifle wood stocks could if necessary be modified with the right skills but that it would be butchery to do so.

jhmartin wrote:
Missed it by a whole 20mm! How can you cut that at 140?

(And yeah ... ignore the taped on weights.......)

That metal stock could be modified - but if you have to pay a shop to do it it will be $00's.

This 140 stock depth is stupidly rediculous, so some think it does not matter because there were few wood stocks in world events, but many national bodies run all their events rigidly to ISSF rules, the UK is one of them. The stock dimensions have operated quite hapily for 70 years, and now some idiot wants to change them and make thousands of shooters rifles illegal, or have to butcher stocks to comply at not inconsiderable cost.

If people rest the stock on their chest, why not just act against that person!!!!!!

RobinC wrote:This 140 stock depth is stupidly rediculous, so some think it does not matter because there were few wood stocks in world events, but many national bodies run all their events rigidly to ISSF rules, the UK is one of them. The stock dimensions have operated quite hapily for 70 years, and now some idiot wants to change them and make thousands of shooters rifles illegal, or have to butcher stocks to comply at not inconsiderable cost.

If people rest the stock on their chest, why not just act against that person!!!!!!

The rule makers are just like the politicians and regulators in our government instead of designing the rules to affect the relatively small group of people. They institute rules against the whole population.

RobinC wrote:This 140 stock depth is stupidly rediculous, so some think it does not matter because there were few wood stocks in world events, but many national bodies run all their events rigidly to ISSF rules, the UK is one of them. The stock dimensions have operated quite hapily for 70 years, and now some idiot wants to change them and make thousands of shooters rifles illegal, or have to butcher stocks to comply at not inconsiderable cost.

If people rest the stock on their chest, why not just act against that person!!!!!!

That used to be allowed! I will eventually write to NSRA to ask how far down the pecking order these rules will apply in UK. There is a tendency to apply all rules for pistol at any open county comp, size box, trigger weight etc. If they apply these new rules at that level for rifle there will be even less entrants. I would hope UK NSRA comp levels 6 7 and 8 (local and postal) will be exempt but some comps like the Ely start at club postal level then hold a Bisley final. Then what??
As soon as the rules are actually published I will write as an affiliated club captain and I hope others do too. Until then this forum is the only source I have found for the leaked rules changes.