New Light Production Class Proposed.

  • 49K Views
  • Last Post 04 September 2011
CB posted this 04 June 2009

June 1, 2009

A new light production class for CBA registered competition has been proposed.

CBA President John Alexander has proposed a new light production class for CBA competiton with the following rules: Max weight of 9.5 lbs. Max scope power of 9X Bedding is allowed Trigger adjustments are allowed No throating or changing the throat or other modifications.

The main difference with this new proposed class is that if a modification is not specifically allowed, then it is prohibited.

This new class would allow many more people to have the ability to compete with others without spending a lot of money on equipment. You would be able to take your hunting rifle and shoot in a cast bullet match.

In the email John sent me asking me to post this on the website he did mention that this new class would be probationary, which means it would have a couple of years to see if it would draw enough interest.

Since there are no records established for this class, there is the opportunity for someone to set new records once the class has passed the probationary period.

This class will need the approval of the CBA BOD at the yearly national meeting at which time I would expect that the rest of the definitions of the class including which targets the class would be fired on will be established.

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
runnin lead posted this 04 June 2009

June 1st entry was extended till June 31st , shot test loads yesterday ,waiting for targets to arive, received new .308 T/C Icon Friday, this is going to be a fun match

Attached Files

tturner53 posted this 04 June 2009

It will be fun.

Attached Files

runnin lead posted this 04 June 2009

Target were at the post office, Back to the reloading bench . Hey I'm suposed to be on vacation & I haven't been up to the Flat Tops to go fishing yet. Can't wait to shoot those targets then I might find time to go fishing then maybe I might find time to mow the lawn for the first time this year . Lilacs just starting to bloom , crabapple tree just bloomed , service berries & chokecherries blooming like crazy. How many times have you mowed your lawn? ya just got to get your priorities straight! dandy lions , those are my wild flowers!   Ahhhhh SPRINGTIME In the ROCKIES:cool: note  the shooting glasses

Attached Files

CB posted this 08 December 2009

Here are the rules for the new probationary class which will be called Hunting Rifle Class.

Official Hunting Rifle Class Rules/ Adopted as probationary 9-11-09

A factory produced rifle manufactured in a quantity of at least 1,000 units over any 12 month period. Rifles produced by a manufacturer's custom shop are prohibited. Rifles using an original issue military action and barrel and meeting the Hunting Rifle Class weight limit are allowed.

Factory sights may be removed, but all other parts, including detachable magazines, must be present and functional when the rifle is weighed or fired. Maximum weight is 9.5 lbs. (4.3 Kg.). Modifications judged to have been made specifically to allow the rifle to meet the weight limit are prohibited. The barrel may be shortened only from the muzzle to facilitate re-crowning, but the barrel's exterior contour may not be altered. The barrel must be chambered for its original cartridge, and the chamber, including the neck, must conform to SAAMI specifications. Factory action, barrel, stock, and trigger appropriate to the model, must be used. The trigger may be adjusted and the barreled action rebedded. Buttstocks may be shortened up to one inch to fit shooter but the factory stock contour may not be altered. Factory parts may be exchanged, however, a reconfigured rifle must duplicate a factory produced model. There is no limit on scope power. Alterations not specifically allowed above are prohibited.

Attached Files

CB posted this 08 December 2009

It didn't say anything about the throat in the rules but I hope rethroating isn't allowed and if it is it shouldn't be. I'm also a little concerned about the military portion of the rule the way it's written. Does that mean as long as it's an as issued barrel and action you an use any trigger, stock, or other modifications you want? Finally I'm not too happy about the no scope limit thing. When I brought this idea up years ago I was thinking about a rifle that someone could shoot in a match and take deer hunting the next day. What the no scope limit means is that 36x scopes wil be showing up on rifles and people will be complaining about the real or imagined difference they make.

Attached Files

CB posted this 08 December 2009

Heh the price we pay for not being able to attend the national meeting.

I didnt write the rule, just posted it. John sent it to me and asked that I post it.

Attached Files

CB posted this 08 December 2009

Which is why a better system should be found. I pushed for this thing for a long time and had absolutely no input on the way the rules were written.

Attached Files

tturner53 posted this 08 December 2009

The original post from way back says no throating or changes to throat. Maybe that still goes.

Attached Files

KenK posted this 08 December 2009

pat i. wrote: It didn't say anything about the throat in the rules I'm not sure if I've read the final version of the rule but the one I did read; said anything not specifically allowed, is NOT allowed.

I would also consider a “military barreled action” to include the original trigger.  I imagined this exception was to allow the zillions of 03s like mine.  All the metal is exactly military issue.  It was just dropped in a Fajen stock sometime in the 60s.

I am a little disapointed in the unlimited scope rule.

Attached Files

CB posted this 09 December 2009

But from past experience I've seen that if you don't put everything in writing there'll be problems. Especially when you specifically mention the chamber and chamber neck but don't mention the throat. And while you might consider a military barreled action to include the trigger the next guy might not and since the action and trigger are two different things he'd be right.

Attached Files

CB posted this 09 December 2009

Perhaps a email to John asking for clarification on the issues is called for??..

Attached Files

Fred Sinclair posted this 09 December 2009

I must be missing something?

If you re-throat to use your favorite “go to” bullet, wouldn't that be about the same as having a custom bullet made to fit your existing throat?

How can could one tell if a throat was altered? A talented gunsmith could easily alter a throat and even set a barrel back, a thread, and you would never know it.

Attached Files

Wally Enga posted this 09 December 2009

pat i. wrote: Which is why a better system should be found. I pushed for this thing for a long time and had absolutely no input on the way the rules were written.

Well not entirely correct --- the CBA Rules state that any CBA member who has competed in a Match can propose a rule change.

*****************

Section 15 REVISIONS TO RULES FOR COMPETITION

 15.1         Proposed Changes - Proposed changes to the rules must be received by the Secretary in writing by June 1 of each year. The Secretary will cause a summary of the proposed changes to be published in the July-August issue of the official journal. The Board of Directors will vote on the proposed changes at that year's annual meeting. The Board of Directors may make minor amendments during the Annual Meeting to proposed rule changes to avoid the necessity of having to make minor changes and present them the following year. The Secretary will then cause changes passed to be published in the official journal. Any change passed by a Director vote of less than 1-1/2 to 1 may be overturned by a majority vote of eligible members.  

15.2         Eligibility To Propose And Vote On Changes - CBA regular members who have competed in at least one CBA registered shoulder-to-shoulder match are eligible to:

                    (a) Initiate a proposal for a change in the Rules or call for a member vote as provided in 15.1

                               (b) Vote on changes passed by a vote of less than 1-1/2 to I as provided in 15.1.

 ************************

At the last annual meeting it was approved to have the Military Rifle Rules stated in a separate stand alone document effective on Jan 01, 2010. This thread reminded me that I had not sent that on to Jeff for posting on the CBA Web site so it will be there shortly.  Hopefully having the Military Rules in their own seperate document will avoid some of the confusion.

 As to some of the equipment questions noted here --- remember that we have 4 different Classes in Military Rifle.

Issue and Big Bore and also the 2 Modified Classes --- Mod Iron and Mod Scope.

In the Issue and Big Bore Classes the ONLY changes you can make to the issued rifle is raise or lower the front sight height and remove the sling & swivel to prevent tearing up your rear bag. You must use the issued trigger in these Classes.

In the Modified Classes you may use an after maket trigger like the Huber.

You can not re-thoat the chamber in any of the Military classes.

For the Light Production Class questions, --- John A would be the guy to get that info from.

Hope this helps.

Wally Enga

 

Attached Files

CB posted this 09 December 2009

I realize shooters can propose rule changes but it's a lot easier to hash these things out and try to get them right before starting it than after they get going and people have guns they're shooting. Since rule change proposals wouldn't even be discussed let alone implemented until Sept of next year a lot can happen equipment wise in the mean time.

The way I'm reading the rule as it stands now pertaining to allowing military guns to shoot in the new hunter class I could take a K31, shorten the barrel to 21 inches, bed it in a BR stock with a 3” forend, put a 2 lb. Huber trigger in it, mount a 45x Leupold on top, and the thing would be a hunting rifle as long as it made weight which it probably would. Am I missing something? I also think if you start talking about chambers and necks it only stands to reason that you specifically make mention that rethroating isn't allowed.

The scope question is a matter of opinion and mine is that there should have been a limit to keep it more in the spirit of the intention of the class.

Attached Files

tturner53 posted this 09 December 2009

Fred, the postals rely completely on the honor system and I believe that most really do honor the rules and play by the rules. There will be cheaters no doubt, but what can you do? It amazes me when I tell someone about a postal match, the first thing most think of is the potential for cheating and suggesting it's silly to compete since no doubt someone will cheat. I don't think that's all that common, but it doesn't worry me, I shoot in competition to compete against myself.

Attached Files

Wally Enga posted this 09 December 2009

Pat

The Hunter Class (Light Production) is a CBA class so John A would be the one check with but I don't think the rifle in your example would be legal in the Hunter class because that 3 inch width modified class stock would not be legal in any of the Military Classes.

The Production Class and I assume the new Hunter Class allow any legal Military Rifle that meets the weight limits but still it would have to be within the Mod stock limits.

Wally

Attached Files

Fred Sinclair posted this 09 December 2009

tturner53 wrote: Fred, the postals rely completely on the honor system and I believe that most really do honor the rules and play by the rules. There will be cheaters no doubt, but what can you do? It amazes me when I tell someone about a postal match, the first thing most think of is the potential for cheating and suggesting it's silly to compete since no doubt someone will cheat. I don't think that's all that common, but it doesn't worry me, I shoot in competition to compete against myself.

I agree with what you say completly!

My question is. If matching the throat to the bullet is cheating would not matching the bullet to the throat be considered cheating?

Attached Files

CB posted this 09 December 2009

Fred the way I look at it is the intention of the class is to both introduce new shooters to the competitive side of the CBA and to let them do it without it becoming an equipment race. I think, actually I'm pretty sure, that the majority of people would never consider running a throating reamer into their deer rifle barrel. If they could get a bullet set up where it fit the existing factory set up by design and not luck I'd consider them one of the better cast bullet experimenters and hopefully they'd pass the knowledge on.

I agree that there's really no way to tell if a guy's done anything to the throat of his rifle but from what I've seen if you start allowing the little things eventually you end up with something completely different from the original intent. There was an incident a few years back where a guy twisted a rule a little bit and did just what you said about setting a barrel back and rechambering with a tight neck in PRO class but eventually he was found out. He didn't actually break the rule because of the way it was written but no one will ever convince me that he didn't bend the heck out of it and knew it when he was doing it.

Hopefully that won't happen again and the class will draw out some people out that don't feel comfortable shooting a box stock Rem 700 or Win Model 70 against a throated 12 lb. Savage BVSS using a bumped and tapered bullet.

I don't know if any of this makes sense but it's the best I can do.

Attached Files

CB posted this 09 December 2009

Wally this is all it says about military rifles being shot in the production class under the current production class rules so I think my example would be legal in both the PRO and the new Hunting Rifle class as the rules stand now. Granted the military rules are a lot more restrictive but this is what's written up above them and there's no place saying to refer to the military rules for equipment requirements. Now i'll agree the chances of anyone building a rifle like the one I described are right between slim and none after going through the hassle caused by including the word “Body” and excluding the word “Neck” in the old PRO class rules i think you have to be pretty specific in how you write a rule.

Rifles using an original issue military action and barrel and meeting the Production Class weight limit may be fired in Production Class with no other restrictions.

Attached Files

CB posted this 09 December 2009

I am glad to see the new Hunting Rifle Class being discussed and some good points have been made. Like all new rules, this one will probably have to be tweaked to get the bugs out but I believe since most members already have an appropriate rifle it will encourage more shooters to try competition .

My general comment on the complaints about the rules:

IT'S FINE TIME TO TELL ME LUCILLE!

With the single exception of the change in scope power, we have been using this set of rules for four years for the Light Production postal matches without receiving even one of the suggestions above for rule changes. Where were your comments when it would have been easy to improve the rules?

Contrary to Pat's contention that he had no input on the rules. Just the opposite is true. Pat, more than anyone, is responsible for the new class. He has pushed it for years and he and I have discussed it repeatedly. We should name it the Pat Iffland Class or at least give him an achievement award for persistence.

My comments on aspects of the specific rules mentioned in this thread:

  1. We probably should have a width restriction for stocks on military barreled actions as well as specifying original military triggers.

  2. Throating -- I think it is clear enough that only specified modifications are allowed and throating isn't specified. Fred's comment is interesting . You are right Fred. The real difference between a $50 throating job and a $150 dollar custom mold to fit the factory throat isn't obvious? I hadn't thought of it that way.

  3. Scope power -- Before proposing the class I polled shooters who had been participating in the Light Production postal matches (limited to 9X ) and they voted to increase the limit to 24 X ( Pat had originally suggested 24X) on the basis that it eliminates the need for a spotting scope and there are a lot of “good enough” 24X scope available for under $100. Unfortunately, a board member made a motion to eliminate the power restriction in the Annual meeting and my arguments to the contrary didn't convince a majority.

I hope that people with suggestions for improving these rules will take the time to propose changes as allowed by the Section 15 of the Rules of Competition and posted above by Wally.

John

Attached Files

Fred Sinclair posted this 09 December 2009

Pat, I fear I'm beginning to sound like a couple of our exiled members so I think I just better drop the subject.

Attached Files

tturner53 posted this 09 December 2009

Well there you go, the devil is always in the details, isn't it? No doubt the little bugs will be ironed out. In the big picture, me and a lot of other shooters have had a lot of fun with this match, it was a great idea in the first place. I agree with John A. that Pat desseves a pat on the back and a thankyou for making this match happen. I'm sure it will serve the intended purpose, as a matter of fact it already has, just look at the match results. A lot of shooters that want to have some fun and test themselves with their actual hunting rifle.

Attached Files

Wally Enga posted this 09 December 2009

Fred, no don't drop out on this subject.  Your comments on thoating / bullet fit with a mold was stated in a way that does make us pause and think about it in a completely different way.

I do lean more towards the old school Frank Marshall day's of the challenge of finding that magic bullet mold ”€œ even if you have to taper/bump it to exactly fit the throat to turn that scatter gun into a tack driver.

On the subject of Military Rifles in Production Class or the new Hunter Class --- if there are no restrictions on the stock style, I will definitely be there with a flat bottomed bench rest stock on a K-31 or M39 and be more then competitive.

A sporter stock on a Military Rifle is if anything a disadvantage off the bench over the military stock --- but a full blown benchrest stock on it would be a totally different animal ”€œ any one want to buy a Savage Model 12?

Wally

Attached Files

tturner53 posted this 09 December 2009

Maybe no matter what the rules say or don't say there will be competitors who are oblivious to the intentions of the originators of this match and  they will find ways to inject technological advantages over other competitors who just want to shoot their old bone stock off the rack common hunting rifle. Some people are just very focused on winning and that's really all that matters to them. That's what fun is for them. Maybe there should be a disclosure in the match info that reads “This match is for competing with ordinary common off the shelf bone stock hunting rifles as most people know them. They have typical factory hunting rifle features and in no way resemble bench rest rifles. Those of you competing within the obvious 'spirit' of this match should understand that some people will neither recognize or conform to the obvious spirit of this match and so will bust their nut to find a way to gain a technological advantage over you so that they can tell themselves they've won something. Do not be discouraged by this, just go ahead and have fun and in your mind bump yourself up a couple places to make up for equipment differences."   EDIT: Substituted “hunting” for “Deer",

Attached Files

Paul Pollard posted this 10 December 2009

tturner53 wrote: “This match is for competing with ordinary common off the shelf bone stock deer rifles as most people know them. They have typical factod by this, just go ahead and have fun and in your mind bump yourself up a couple places to make up for equipment differences."

Well, if it's only for deer rifles, then this is not the class for my light production woodchuck rifle.

Attached Files

CB posted this 10 December 2009

There certainly has been some discussion on the new class, which I think is good.

My opinion is if you want to have a hunters class it should be as close to stock out of the box as possible.

I can see bedding and reworking the factory trigger and maybe even recrowning, but that should be the limit. I also feel that there are no hunting rifles out there sporting 36x scopes. I would like to see a 4 to 12 power limit otherwise we already have a class for those type rifles. I do not support throating and that should be specifically defined in the rules.

I have a post 64 M70 with a heavy tapered barrel on it that meets the weight and it is the stealth model used in law enforcement that would give me a serious advantage above any of the other “hunting rifles", but I see an unfair advantage. It was produced as a tactical rifle...

The arguments can go on forever..

The fact is the only way to amend the rules at this pint is to submit a rule change before the 1st of June I think it is so the board can consider it at the next meeting in September of 2010..

Attached Files

mrbill2 posted this 10 December 2009

Here's the problem: My opinion is if you want to have a hunters class it should be as close to stock out of the box as possible.

I can see bedding and reworking the factory trigger and maybe even recrowning, but that should be the limit.

We can't have it both ways, it's either stock or it's a altered hunting rifle. My $.02

mrbill2

Attached Files

CB posted this 10 December 2009

Exactly the point..

It all comes down to what your definition of what a hunting class rifle is...

Everyone has a different opinion on that subject.

I for one as a match director that runs sanctioned CBA matches believe in a single rule, “come out with what ever you have to shoot and have a good time with us".

Anyone that has ever attended one of the matches I run can tell you that we have a great time.

If it aint fun, why do it? I havent seen a single person get rich from winning a cast bullet match and I doubt anyone ever will. Conversely I have seen many people have a great time, make new friends and enjoy the company of old friends and incidently burn a little powder in the process.

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 10 December 2009

Jeff Bowles wrote: Exactly the point..

If it aint fun, why do it? I havent seen a single person get rich from winning a cast bullet match and I doubt anyone ever will. Conversely I have seen many people have a great time, make new friends and enjoy the company of old friends and incidently burn a little powder in the process. My thoughts also, Jeff. One of the reasons I started and have stayed with Military Rifle classes, is that the shooters are having fun.

Attached Files

tturner53 posted this 10 December 2009

Point taken, post amended to substitute 'deer' with 'hunting'. I can see now that this is like the proverbial elephant, we're just looking at different ends of the same animal. There will be people who would like a chance to compete with 'ol Betsy just for the fun of it, and there will be people more intent on winning. If the intent of this match is to give 'ol Betsy a chance at being competitive it aint gonna happen. Human nature won't allow it. It is very much like the special muzzleloader hunts when they were first instituted for many states.The day they opened the race was on to develop technological advantages to exploit the hunts. I think the 'spirit' of those hunts was obvious and included traditional muzzleloaders. But human nature and greed took their natural inevitable course so that now about all you see is space age 'muzzleloaders' in the woods during a muzzleloader season. I truly suspect that the people who worked so hard to get the special muzzleloader hunts approved are sorry now after seeing where their efforts have led. I also suspect most fish and game departments will not likely make the same mistake again any time soon. The spirit of those special hunts was obvious, but there's people who don't get it and maybe never will, same as this match. The irony is that the arms race guys may be the ones who actually get the least from the match and the guy shootin' 'ol Betsy is the real winner, regardless of score. My opinion is very biased by the fact that my idea of fun is working with guns that are in no way target guns. I like the challenge and it appeals to my cheap side.;)

Attached Files

canalupo posted this 10 December 2009

The main reason I do not shoot in any matches is because of the constant tug of war on rules and rule changes. The purists want to shoot factory issued hardware. The techno-crats want to stretch the rules until they no longer apply.

I think I will stick to plinking cans with the rifle I bought at Walmart.

My two cents.

Bob D

Attached Files

CB posted this 10 December 2009

"Well, if it's only for deer rifles, then this is not the class for my light production woodchuck rifle."

There is nothing written or implied in the rules that Hunting Rifle Class is only for deer rifles. Hunting is hunting from starlings to elephants all are welcome, specialized rifles are ruled out as much as possible.

The main intent was to write the rules to allow practical hunting rifles competitive. Many serious hunters tweak the trigger or bedding a bit so it didn't seem reasonable to rule that out but almost all other modifications that could make a difference in performance are ruled out.

It is true that not many hunting rifles wear the 24 to 36X scopes that may show up, but most of the people who came forward and actually shot in the postals wanted a higher power. I believe that people who are willing to participate should be heard. Something about age and not wanting to fiddle around with a spotting scope I suspect. If these rifles go into the woods they will probably wear a 3-9X but what is the big deal with switching scopes?

I will propose changes in the rules to require military triggers for military actions and put a limit on the maximum width of stock. If there are other changes that need to be made let me know.

I hope all of you that have contributed to this discussion will give it a try.

John

Attached Files

CB posted this 10 December 2009

<"The main reason I do not shoot in any matches is because of the constant tug of war on rules and rule changes. The purists want to shoot factory issued hardware. The techno-crats want to stretch the rules until they no longer apply.">

I don't believe this has been a problem for the CBA rules for a long time - if ever. We have had one change to Production Class in the last ten years (to prevent tight necks) I believe Heavy, Unrestricted, Long Range Handgun, and Plain Base have been unchanged for at least ten years. This seems to me to be a non-existent problem.

Some people like to compete and some don't. There are lots of ways to enjoy shooting cast bullets. The CBA is for shooters who enjoy any of them. But there has been no “tug of war” over changing rules.

John

Attached Files

billwnr posted this 10 December 2009

John,

If the Modified Scope class in Military allows the replacement of triggers these rules should also mirror that. Nothing more, nothing less.

Also I intend to break out my 788 .308 and shoot it in a match or two just to support the new class.

Attached Files

tturner53 posted this 10 December 2009

OK BILL!! That's what I like to hear. Again, my thanks to all of you who put on the postals and to Pat for helping this one get going. I really look forward to shooting the postal matches. I would like to hear more from you guys shooting in this match, specifically about your guns and loads. I'm betting there's an interesting story behind a lot of them, Some of us pm each other about what we're going to use, it'd be great to hear from more shooters on the forum. I used to have a 788 in .308, still kicking myself for letting that one go.   EDIT My thoughts on what I consider the 'spirit' of this match have nothing to do with any other match. I don't have a thing against serious competition or advanced gunsmithing. I respect the accomplishments of the many serious shooters in the CBA. I hope to build a rifle myself for heavy class.

Attached Files

CB posted this 10 December 2009

To clarify something I didn't get this thig going. Granted I brought it up more than a few times but it never went anywhere until John Alexander decided to give it a go. Hopefully it'll do what it was intended to do and draw out a few new, especially younger, shooters to the matches.

I have a 788 in 30-30 that would be fun to try in the new class but unfortunately it had a throating reamer run into it before I bought so I'll have to try my Win 670 in 30-06. It's my most accurate hunting rifle with jacketed bullets but I've never tried a cast bullet in it. Something new to play with.

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 10 December 2009

Heck, if the bulleyes were bigger and black, I'd like to shoot my Newton, but it only has peep sights on it. Looking through the safe, it is the only bolt gun I have for a deer cartridge that isn't military or sportized Springfield. But I may try the postal at 100 yards, maybe in the bright light I could pick up the target rings.

Attached Files

CB posted this 10 December 2009

Ric You can come over to Washtenaw anytime and I'll hang some MR-52's and Mr-31's for ya to shoot at!

Pat if you shoot your 670, I will shoot my M70! that would make us about even, maybe most X's buys the beer?

Attached Files

CB posted this 10 December 2009

Maybe we should change that to most hits on the target buys the beer.

Attached Files

Fred Sinclair posted this 11 December 2009

" It is true that not many hunting rifles wear the 24 to 36X scopes that may show up, but most of the people who came forward and actually shot in the postals wanted a higher power. I believe that people who are willing to participate should be heard. Something about age and not wanting to fiddle around with a spotting scope I suspect. If these rifles go into the woods they will probably wear a 3-9X but what is the big deal with switching scopes?"

I for one didn't like the idea of a 36X on a hunting rifle but the above quote sure makes me sit up and shut up. Probably one reason John is president!

Although John, you could have left the age thing out.

 

Attached Files

muley posted this 11 December 2009

when we discuss the scope poer in the hunting class , we should look at what can be done with a 6x and  M39 on conventional  cba targets. If u have shot next to Walley , u know u don"t need a high power scope. I agree with the thought of shooting for enjoyment.  Let the rule benders do their own thing.

Attached Files

canalupo posted this 11 December 2009

I have a question that should throw a wrench into the idea of production class. In Pa. semiautos are not allowed for hunting purposes. I am not aware if this applies to all States. So please clarify. What is to stop someone from taking an AR 15 to a match?

As to my post about purists and techno-crats. The CBA may not have this “problem” but  my comment is in all facets of competition not just the CBA.  Traditional archers have the same beef. Wood arrows are traditional but people compete with aluminum or carbon/graphite. Flintlock shooters same problem.  The mini ball was not available during the Revolutionary War but all the so-called flintlock shooters use them. Stretching the rules is inherent in some people

Similar discussion applies. Humans will stretch the rules as long as they are ambiguous. A hunting rifle is a hunting rifle whether it is a varmint gun, a 22 rimfire or a 600 nitro express double rifle.

As I said in my earlier post, I will stick to shooting cans with my Walmart special.

Bob D

Attached Files

CB posted this 11 December 2009

John A. wrote: I will propose changes in the rules to require military triggers for military actions and put a limit on the maximum width of stock. If there are other changes that need to be made let me know. John

John,

 I could be wrong about this but wasn't something voted on and passed in the recent past that allowed the BOD to tweak rules a little bit during the year if it became necessary? Maybe I just dreamt it but if I thought something like that was discussed.

Attached Files

KenK posted this 11 December 2009

canalupo wrote:  What is to stop someone from taking an AR 15 to a match?

.

Bob D Why should someone be stopped from taking their AR to a match?

Attached Files

CB posted this 11 December 2009

I believe that was for when someone submitted a rule change the BOD could tweak it before voting on it. But then again we may have voted on that also, cant remember.. I do remember it was at KC year before last.

Attached Files

CB posted this 11 December 2009

I have some guys that show up and shoot AR's at my matches, cant say they used lead but none the less. As I stated in my previous replies, come on out and have a good time. I have seen some fellows shoot lead in AR's, but the results were less than desirable.

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 11 December 2009

KenK wrote: canalupo wrote:  What is to stop someone from taking an AR 15 to a match?

.

Bob D Why should someone be stopped from taking their AR to a match? I would think AR's would be welcome in production matches!!!! But they are not military issue rifles. Then you would have to bring an M16, M16A1 or M16A4 to the military matches.

Attached Files

CB posted this 12 December 2009

billwnr wrote: John,

"If the Modified Scope class in Military allows the replacement of triggers these rules should also mirror that. Nothing more, nothing less."

Bill, it would be nice if we could do that without causing trouble. It is possible in Mod. Scope class in military because that is a separate class.

To allow after market triggers on military iron in the Hunting Rifle Class would mean that they should be allowed on the non-military rifles as well. That would lead to two ounce Jewell triggers on the Remingtons and we would be off to the equipment races.

>

Canalupo, You are absolutely right. I didn't mean to disagree in general - only that it hasn't seemed to be a serious problem in the CBA for quite a while. We are all such a bunch of lovable characters.

If I lived a bit closer I would come and help you with those tin cans. I have an ancient 25-20 that is just right for the job.

Pat, I believe Jeff is right the “rule adjustment” can be done before the vote.

Fred, You are right the age thing could be left unsaid. Although with my 77th coming up I have standing to pass on geezer joke when I hear a good one.

John

John

Attached Files

ubetcha posted this 12 December 2009

I'm looking forward to this class.This would be my first competition with my rifle.I plan on using my stock out of the box Ruger M77 in 30-06 with either 3x9 or 24x what ever is allowed.The club I belong to also has some bench rest club matches and I plan on using the same equipment.Cast bullets and all.Even though I think they are using j-bullets my last load test showed some pretty good groups.If I can figure out how to get the picture from my camera to the web , I will post the target for some critiquing.

Attached Files

muley posted this 12 December 2009

uBETCHA, i HAVE A FELLOW SHOOTER USING A RUGER 77 OUT OF THE BOX IN .308 USING THE lYMAN 308334 BULLET CAST 50/50 AND DOING 1” OR BETTER. GOOD LUCK WITH UR 06.

Attached Files

Fred Sinclair posted this 13 December 2009

Just one more comment, if your lucky, on the subject.

I got involved in this thread due to the compelling sense of familiarity of a new class “to attract new shooters". Having seen what the NBRSA and IBS allowed to happen to the Sporter class in the late 60s and then the Hunter class a decade later it all sounded deja Vu. The idea back then was the same as the new CBA class, to attract new shooters. Those classes today are full blown big dollar, 3 grand and up, rifles. Certainly not the intent of the class.

 For the most part, class rules for all three above examples, were laid out by competitive shooters. The wants and desires of a potential new shooter have to take priority, it should not matter what an experienced competitive shooter wants. There are more than enough other classes for them to shoot.

 We need more new participating members not another class for existing shooters. For the sake of the sport I beg you to use caution during the probationary period. Start with whatever rules you see fit but turn the class over to the match directors for the final say so. Active match directors are the heart of competitive shooting and the association's direct link to that potential new competitor.

 I cannot over emphasize what an important role your match directors play. They are the front line. They are constantly being updated, usually in a not so nice way, what new and experienced shooters think, want and need. These people have to enforce the rules maybe we should add another burden and let them adjust them as/if needed?

Attached Files

ubetcha posted this 13 December 2009

Here is the picture of my target(hopefully I did it right).The shots outside of the second red triangle are a different load. The ones closest to the center is the load I'm after.Hopefully I can repeat it http://s974.photobucket.com/albums/ae222ubetchaphoto/?action=veiw&current=001.jpg"

Attached Files

ubetcha posted this 13 December 2009

Well it didn't work

Attached Files

CB posted this 13 December 2009

Fred Sinclair wrote: I got involved in this thread due to the compelling sense of familiarity of a new class “to attract new shooters". Having seen what the NBRSA and IBS allowed to happen to the Sporter class in the late 60s and then the Hunter class a decade later it all sounded deja Vu. The idea back then was the same as the new CBA class, to attract new shooters. Those classes today are full blown big dollar, 3 grand and up, rifles. Certainly not the intent of the class.  Hi Fred,

You are right on for the most part. The 'thinking' that a 'new class' will bring in new shooters is only an ideal. Like you say about the role of the match directors and especially of the clubs shooting registered CBA matches, that is where new members will come from.

The eveidence is in the success of the number of shooters in the Hawkeye Club, who got involved out of nowhere. It wasn't just several shooters deciding to shoot CBA matches, but 1 or 2 guys recruiting new shooters and helping out new casters into the art of casting and shooting CBs.

Competition will always be a race game of some kind, money wise in rifles, glass and equipment. That is the nature of competition which the hunter with his hunting rifle most likely will never give a hoot for punching paper. Thanks for you input Fred.................DanW

Attached Files

Tom Acheson posted this 13 December 2009

Unfortunately, Dan is probably right, it's just an “ideal”. But”¦when we discussed this at Raton in Sept. it seemed as if it was felt the audience for this new rifle category was aimed at was the existing CBA BR crowd. True, Postal shooters wanted a certain latitude but those are CBA members already (Postal rules require membership). We had no feedback or commentary from real “new” shooters (how could we?) so absent that marketing influence we needed to do something and we did.

I'm a bit opposite as I thought we should be going after the brand new shooter but we are up against trying to entice new young shooters to take up casting. Tough challenge!

Each spring I sponsor a CBA table at our local “big” gun show. In the past we have focused on the CBA BR game. This March we'll change. We'll try to be more focused on casting and fun shooting with CB's in general and probably a more overt representation of revolvers and pistols for fun.

Fred is right on the Match Directors”¦without them all of our debates on gun categories at matches is a lost cause. Maybe two years from now we'll have a more solid perspective on what the reaction was to the new category was from the consumers standpoint. I suspect though that telling potential new shooters/hunters that they can use any scope power may give them the wrong intention about the category. None of them will have Dan's well developed and expressed (above) competition perspective. With one more formal category we may see dilution of participation in the current categories at the matches. We'll see”¦

Tom

Attached Files

CB posted this 13 December 2009

Tom the dilution of existing classes was always the argument of the guys who were against this in the first place but the very same guys decided to allow military rifles to shoot in CBA matches which added what, 4 or more classes to the game? I guess self interest trumps dilution.

I think the popularity of the military matches is a good omen for a new class. People are shooting what they have and don't have to go out and spend a grand or more to feel competitive.

Competition on this level will only become a race game if the people that write and OK the rules let it. I agree from what I've seen that people tend to want to change and adopt rules that will benefit them but if it's not allowed it doesn't have to become a race. Which is why I think not having a limit on glass was the wrong way to go. When I originaly suggested 24x it was so a guy could see the target and because a study of various catalogs found you could get one on the cheap. Do I think a 9x limit would be more in the spirit of the class? Of course I do but you have to let common sense over rule spirit once in a while. I wonder how many of the guys who voted for no scope limit would have voted that way if they didn't just happen to have a spare 36x scope laying under the bed.

We have to be realistic about this. BR makes up a very small part of the CBA and guys aren't going to be crawling out of the woodwork to do it. BUT I do think with the cost of components constantly rising casting is going to become more popular and if we have a place for new guys to get their feet wet without spending money the CBA BR program will be better for it. Even the newest Gun Digest has an article on casting and it's the first time I've seen that.

Attached Files

hunterspistol posted this 13 December 2009

     :coffee  I like the sound of this, would let me shoot my rifle if I wanted. The category of 'Any Sights' that the NRA used to have is good at bringing people in to events.  I guess you could drag a rebedded rifle out hunting, never thought about that.  The way I see it, I'd rather get beat by a 36 power scope and some money spent, than by regulations.  There's too much “You can't do that” built into shooting events nowdays.  If he can hold a 24 or 36X scope steady , then let him shoot it. Of course, I realize this is benchrest. I have no qualms about using 12 power and 16 power scopes but, I don't have exceptional eyesight either. And sure, good eyes and a 3-9X would beat me anyway.  It's not who wins, it's whether you have a good time.  Nobody wants to win only to discover that all the competition quit and went home.  Good sportsmanship covers that unfortunate soul that 'absolutely HAS to win'.

Ron

Attached Files

Buffalo Bill posted this 13 December 2009

In my opinion if the new class is called Light Production Rifle or Light Hunting Rifle, then the weight limit should be closer to 7.5 pounds than 9.5 pounds. 9.5 pounds for a Light Production or Hunting Rifle at first blush sounds more like a serious benchrest shooter proposed it rather that a person who often carries a rifle around in the hunting fields or woods all day. And the scope power limit should be a maximum of 9X (actually I would prefer a maximum of 6X, but I realize there are lots of 3 x 9 variables out there on big game hunting rifles). Just my humble opinion, not trying to get into a debate.

Attached Files

CB posted this 14 December 2009

The rebedding and trigger adjustment part of the rule shouldn't be a bone of contention, it's pretty common on people's rifles. The scope thing is different but like Tom said without feedback from people shooting the class there's no way to tell. Fred gave some very good advice about watching what's allowed even with feedback because people are always looking for an advantage and rules can spiral out of control. A 7 1/2 lb limit would be too restrictive in my opinion.

I don't feel the way the rule's almost written it's too restrictive at all. People know the intent of the class but you have to specify things so there's no bending them to the breaking point. If you don't add a few “You can't do that's” to a rule there will be someone who does and claims he didn't know he couldn't because the rule didn't say so. My example of what a guy could do to a military gun if he set his mind to it under the current wording is just what I'm talking about and if I could figure it out someone else could too.

Attached Files

JetMech posted this 14 December 2009

pat i. wrote: The rebedding and trigger adjustment part of the rule shouldn't be a bone of contention, it's pretty common on people's rifles. The scope thing is different but like Tom said without feedback from people shooting the class there's no way to tell. Fred gave some very good advice about watching what's allowed even with feedback because people are always looking for an advantage and rules can spiral out of control. A 7 1/2 lb limit would be too restrictive in my opinion.

I don't feel the way the rule's almost written it's too restrictive at all. People know the intent of the class but you have to specify things so there's no bending them to the breaking point. If you don't add a few “You can't do that's” to a rule there will be someone who does and claims he didn't know he couldn't because the rule didn't say so. My example of what a guy could do to a military gun if he set his mind to it under the current wording is just what I'm talking about and if I could figure it out someone else could too.I agree 100%. The intent, it seems to me, is to get new shooters into the sport. The 9.5 limit eliminates most heavy barrel varminters. I would think a 12X scope limit would be reasonable, as many deer rifles carry 4X12s, but you gentlemen have been at this a long time and have some very inciteful comments. Me, I'll just shoot my Marlin with it's 1.75X5. I'll be good incentive to improve it's current 2 1/2” groups.

Attached Files

Reg Lingle posted this 14 December 2009

Dollar Bill: I don't think 7.5 pounds is too restrictive! If I were to build a rifle with a 9.5 pound limit, I could, and it would be as competitive as a IBS Hunter class rifle because of todays super light stocks. I believe in NRA hard and fast type rules. 7.5 pound rifle limit, 2.5 pound trigger - minimum, scope limit 9 power, anybody's barrel, anybody's reamer and throat design. I do not think most shooters would buy a $370 barrel before gunsmiths fees for this class although somebody might and to me that's alright. I have shot several matches where you shoot what you brung, they were fun and encouraged new shooters. The people who 4x12 scopes, - tape them at 9 power. There are too many hunters who have 3x9's. Just my thoughts on a subject where people want to start out with rules on something with too limit which are too high. Reg

Attached Files

CB posted this 14 December 2009

Reg,

What we're talking about here is the new class for production hunting rifles and building anything puts you right out of the class. Most of the offerings are going to start out at a bit over 7 pounds or more and when you get through adding a scope and mounts you're up in the 8 1/4 to 9 lb area depending on what you use. 7 1/2 lbs would be much too restrictive for this game and disqualify most of the guns people have in their closets.

Attached Files

billwnr posted this 14 December 2009

pat i. wrote: Reg,

What we're talking about here is the new class for production hunting rifles and building anything puts you right out of the class. Most of the offerings are going to start out at a bit over 7 pounds or more and when you get through adding a scope and mounts you're up in the 8 1/4 to 9 lb area depending on what you use. 7 1/2 lbs would be much too restrictive for this game and disqualify most of the guns people have in their closets. I was going to say the same thing.  A Winchester Model 70 in 7mm Mag with a full sized 3x9 scope and sling goes 9.4 lbs.  I was weighing things a few years ago to see what the carrying around weight was.  I think that was also with 4 loaded rounds.

Attached Files

tturner53 posted this 16 December 2009

Bill, if you shoot your 7mm mag. I'll shoot my 700 7mm mag too. I think this cartridge is underrepresented in the matches in general, it's a fine cast bullet shooter, and is sure a popular hunting cartridge. I'll admit I haven't hunted with mine, but I have shot cbs in it. And it's still wearing the Loopy 3x9 it had on it back in the sixties. Works great. I use it to experiment with very slow powders, like 5010. Now that I've been reading everything I can find by Ken Mollohan I think I'll reopen the 7mm mag. project with a couple new twists.

Attached Files

tturner53 posted this 17 December 2009

ubetcha, I see you got your picture up, nice shootin'.

Attached Files

Lefty posted this 21 December 2009

I have been waiting for this Light Production or Hunting Rifle class to get legs. During the decade or so that I have been actively participating in CBA matches, I have shot Heavy, Production,Unresricted and every Military class except Issue. I like variety and I like to experiment but mostly I just like to shoot. In our region at least there are many others like me. Whats my point. My point is that the Hunting Rifle class will not be just a class for shooters new to CBA matches. We will draw shooters from other classes. I believe there will be a migration of shooters from the Production class seeking to shoot a rifle that is closer to a true production rifle. I also think we will see some military shooters either migrate or begin to shoot a new “Red” target discipline. Many of us have a favorite hunting rifle that we think is very accurate. Now is the time to dust that thing off and bring it out.

9.5 lb is as light as you can go and not eliminate many of our favorites. While I would have preferred a 12X limit on the scopes, the difference is more one of appearances than actual performance. I intend to shoot a 12X on my rifle and I won't feel handicapped.

Finally I hope this class brings out other calibers than the tried and true thirties. This development alone, if it happens, would make this class worth while.

Randon thoughts - sorry for getting a little long winded. Thanks to the powers that be for giving this class a try.

Attached Files

ubetcha posted this 25 December 2009

Will this class be a postal match also?Unfortunetly I don't have a sactioned CBA range in my area.

Attached Files

CB posted this 26 December 2009

They're shooting it in the postals now. Go over to the CBA site and look at the postal match results from the last few years it's all there.

Attached Files

ubetcha posted this 27 December 2009

With all the suggestions and comments on scope power, at this time,what is the max power allowed. On the CBA home page I think it said 9x

Attached Files

CB posted this 27 December 2009

I assume the postal will be like the shoulder to shoulder matches and not have a scope limit since that's what was voted in this year. We'll have to ask Jeff to change that on the website.

Attached Files

tturner53 posted this 27 December 2009

See post #5 by Jeff. It says no limit on scope power. Anyway the rules go, this will be a very fun match to shoot. Great opportunity to play with the old safe queen.

Attached Files

ubetcha posted this 27 December 2009

Thanks guys.I must have missed that part

Attached Files

galenaholic posted this 29 December 2009

A very interesting topic. The way I understand things, my M70 Youth Ranger in .308 Win. would not be allowable. I'll start at the beginning. I won the rifle in a raffle held at a gun show. The stock on the rilfe is way too short for me to even shoot it wearing several layers of thick clothing for a deep winter hunt. So, that little gem sits in a Ramline stock , but it's otherwise strictly stock. FWIW, it's one of my pet deer rifles but shoots mostly cast for most of the year. It even sports a low budget Tasco scope.

Another thing that bothers me is using scopes higher than what is usually found on a hunting rifle. I think that a scope in the 3x9X area would be Ok but I kind of balk at higher powered scopes.

I guess maybe I should be more clear on this. I remember when silhouette shooting was all the rage. As the game originated, plain off the shelf hunting rifles were the rule, but then the “money shooters” with  their “cheater” target rifles took over forcing many of the “little guys” out of the game because they could not have a chance being competitive.

It's that kind of stuff that helps to keep the new blood from coming in, or if they do, they soon leave because it becomes too expensive for them to compete. I think that keeping the costs down as much as possible would be a consideration considering today's economy.

Just a few thoughts I have on the subject.

Paul B.

Attached Files

cityboy posted this 29 December 2009

galenaholic wrote: It's that kind of stuff that helps to keep the new blood from coming in, or if they do, they soon leave because it becomes too expensive for them to compete. I think that keeping the costs down as much as possible would be a consideration considering today's economy.

Just a few thoughts I have on the subject.

Paul B.

You are right. Too many people are being priced out of all forms of competitive shooting. It should not be a money game.

Jim

Attached Files

CB posted this 29 December 2009

I don't know why I keep answering to this thread and there's people that have more right than I but here goes.

Paul, No your rifle wearing a Ram line stock would not be allowed. I realize you and probably others might think this is going a little too far but you have to realize that once you let the camels nose under the tent the next thing you know the whole camel's in there with you. By keeping the rules as strict as possible about the equipment allowed you're able to keep the intent of the class from spiraling out of control and running the new guys out of the game. If you are interested in shooting in the class hopefully you have something else to use or would consider contacting John Alexander to see if a thicker butt pad or one of those slip on deals would be legal. The scope thing is going to cause some complaints but you're shooting at a pretty small target at 200 yds and on the score target there's 5 record bulls plus a spotter. I don't know about everyone else but my eyesight isn't what it used to be and a little help is a good thing. 

I'm glad to see there's some discussion about the new class and competitive shooting in general. I love the competitive side of the CBA and hope people actually get involved in it. The new class is the perfect place for all the people that felt they never had a chance against the bigger guns. I realize that not everyone lives close to a range currently holding matches but with something like this and shooting score only there's no reason a few guys couldn't get together and try to start their own match program at their local range. Nowhere in the rules does it say you have to shoot both 100 and 200 yards and by shooting score only you do away with having to worry about moving backers. All you need is 4 guys to hold a match and the registration process and match running is pretty easy to do. The most important thing right now is that the Light PRO class is a probationary class and if there's not enough interest shown it'll go away. Running or competing in matches is a great way to meet fellow cast bullet shooters both locally and nationally and a lot of fun. I've met a lot of really great guys from coast to coast and border to border, and a few exceptionally great guys from north of the border, that I never would have known existed if I didn't compete.

Attached Files

JetMech posted this 30 December 2009

There's always going to be someone who is bothered by the fact that their pet rifle is disallowed because it doesn't meet the class rules. The only rifle I have that meets the rules is a Marlin 30-30 that wears a 1.75X5 scope. So be it. It won't stop me from shooting against anyone just because virtually everyone may be shooting bolt rifles, probably with 12, 24 or 36X scopes. The objective of the class is to get more people involved. I believe it will work.

Attached Files

CB posted this 30 December 2009

Since I feel I had something to do with getting this going in the first place it finally dawned on me what the original intent was and will try to explain the scope issue.

When talking it over with John through the years having a Hunting Rifle Class was never discussed. What was discussed was a place where a guy could take his hunting rifle and have a place to shoot in a match without equipment envy or spending money. Might sound similar but there's a big difference between a Light Production Class and a Hunting Rifle Class. This is a Light Production Class where someone shooting an 8 1/2 lb bone stock Rem 700 BDL in .243 isn't shooting against someone shooting a 12 lb. Savage 12 BVSS varmint rifle in .308 that's been throated. The postals have a Practical Deer Hunting class where you shoot at a picture of a deer, this isn't the same. When thought about in that light maybe I was wrong to suggest a limit on scope power. I would have liked to have seen one for the simple fact that 24x power scopes can be had for not a lot of bucks but if this thing actually does succeed feedback will be coming in and the board will have a better idea of what people want. Rules aren't set in stone and in my opinion as long as we keep the rifle modifications as limited as possible the scope part is small potatoes.  

Attached Files

tturner53 posted this 30 December 2009

Bill, that Marlin might be more competitive than you think. It would be easy to swap that scope for a little more magnification too. There's a lot of info here on the 30-30 and the Marlins. I shot a Win 94 and Marlin 1894c in the lever match(double entry) and got respectable groups, I thought. The Marlin will be back next year sporting a new bullet from Jeff's LBT group buy. Veral says the gun/combo is capable of 2” at 100 if all is right. Shot the Marlin in the Deer Hunter match(offhand 'lifesize' deer picture) and managed 4th and $4 prize money. I've probably beat this dead horse a bit, but for me the postals are for having fun with my guns I wouldn't use much otherwise, I'm not that competitive. I would like to try some registered match shooting, maybe down in Modesto, and get a little more serious about that. If any of you NorCal guys are interested in a registered match up here let me know, maybe we could put something together.

Attached Files

KenK posted this 01 January 2010

Dollar Bill wrote:  The only rifle I have that meets the rules is a Marlin 30-30  

The Ranch Dog postal match showed how accurate lever actions in general and Marlins in particular can be.  I shot a 336xlr in 30-30 that was much more accurate (with plain base cast) than my 1903 Springfield.

The whole subject of “equipment races” is interesting to me.  I can see both sides of the argument but the bottom line is that those who are competitive in nature will do what they can to compete as best they can.  Even with everybody shooting “out of the box” rifles, somebody is going to have a better/more accurate rifle than somebody else.

I can remember when my dad was heavily involved in bullseye pistol shooting and they started a new club here.  A lot of the new guys got disgusted and quit.  Many of them blamed equipment issues but the bottom line is that my dad and the other good shooters practiced for hours every week and would have continued to beat them soundly if they traded pistols with them.

I have wondered about the popularity of the Savage rifles so maybe somebody can answer this for me; do any of the top shooters in the production classes swap out factory barrels until they find a particularly accurate one?  I know that they have a solid reputation for being an accurate rifle anyway.

Attached Files

muley posted this 01 January 2010

ken, I agree with u on the enjoyment of trying to get the best from my rifles. I ENJOY TRYING DIFFERENT BULLETS AND LOADS. If I improve myself I am happy. On the possibility of swapping barrels on the savages, It never entered my mind, but I guess some one may need an edge. I find my rifle improves the more I shoot it. could be the rifle is “shooting in ” or maybe I am learning. any way, whatever we shoot , we should enjoy it.

Attached Files

CB posted this 01 January 2010

KenK wrote: Dollar Bill wrote:  I have wondered about the popularity of the Savage rifles so maybe somebody can answer this for me; do any of the top shooters in the production classes swap out factory barrels until they find a particularly accurate one?  I know that they have a solid reputation for being an accurate rifle anyway.

I don't shoot that class but have talked to guys about it so might be able to answer your question.

To the best of my knowledge people aren't swapping out barrels to find a good one. From what I was told Savage doesn't sell barrels to the public which means it would require you to ship the rifle to them to have a different barrel fit. Also from what I understand it isn't exactly cheap to do. Since there's not much to be gained monetarily in the CBA program by winning it wouldn't be cost effective to do and I don't think you'd gain much anyway by just going to another Savage barrel.

I had a couple of Savage 223s and a 22/250 I used for prairie dog shooting and think they are just one of if not the most accurate out of the box gun you can get. 

Attached Files

CB posted this 02 January 2010

There is a place called Sharpshooter supply that sells take off barrels for Savages. Personally I shoot a model 12 that I have changed the barrel on.

However Dan Willems has won production class several times with a Savage and Grand champion a couple with the same gun. Savages have won the past 5 years with the exception of 2007 when a Ruger won it.

Attached Files

CB posted this 03 January 2010

Jeff do you have to call SSS to find out about take off barrels? I looked on their website and saw no mention of them. I have a old single shot long action set up in a McMillan stock around here and wouldn't mind picking up a take off to stick on it.

Attached Files

CB posted this 10 January 2010

It is encouraging to see the level of interest this topic seems to have stirred up. I have been out of town for the last three weeks and haven't been able to comment and answer questions that have come up. Fortunately Pat (my co-conspirator in getting this class started) has answered most of the questions.

There is one aspect of the rules that, not surprisingly, keeps being questioned. Why in the heck are high power scopes allowed for a class that is supposed to be for practical hunting rifles? Pat has explained some of the reasons, but the question still keeps popping up.

To shoot effectively in CBA 100 & 200 yard competition, you need either a higher power scope than is normally on a hunting rifle or a spotting scope. If you can't see where your shots are landing you won't be competitive in a wind and there is always wind. People normally don't carry a spotting scope into the woods either so there will be a bit of compromise away from strictly “what I hunt with” ”€œ or a lot of frustration.

Cost isn't a valid argument against allowing a higher power scope because a 6-24X scopes that will spot bullet holes at 200 yards can be bought for well under $100. (mine was $59.95 and is good enough). Cheap spotting scopes cost about the same and you need one or the other. Higher priced equipment will always be an advantage but a $1,000 9X will be more of an advantage over a $60 9x than a $1,000 36X over a $60 24X.

However, the most important reason for allowing higher power scopes is that after running postal matches for this class for four years with the power limited to 9X, the shooters actually participating voted overwhelmingly to change to a higher power. I believe we should respect the opinion of the people who are interested enough in this class to make it successful.

No set of rules is perfect and all should be subject to change if needed. We did the best we could while writing the set approved by the Board.

I hope that Hunting Rifle will turn out to be a popular class and will attract people deterred by the high cost of participating in our other classes.

John

Attached Files

JetMech posted this 10 January 2010

John A. wrote: It Cost isn't a valid argument against allowing a higher power scope because a 6-24X scopes that will spot bullet holes at 200 yards can be bought for well under $100. (mine was $59.95 and is good enough). Another well-reasoned point.  I would never consider an inexpensive 6 X 24 scope for hunting because I have seen too many failures under hunting conditions, whether it be a broken reticule, fogging, or inability to transmit light effectively on an overcast sunrise. Plus, I personally, have never hunted where anything over 6X would be an advantage. These failures are either not going to happen shooting a typical CB load or are not going to affect my ability to shot off the bench. The inexpensive scopes I've installed worked just fine off the bench as even the cheapest of scopes provide a decent sight picture in the center of the glass.

Another valid point that seems to be missed (myself included) is that this is a “light production” class, not hunting. 

Attached Files

tturner53 posted this 10 January 2010

Any takers on the 7mm Rem. Mag. challenge? Or some other equally unsuitable cartridge?

Attached Files

CB posted this 12 January 2010

I hope that the name of this class won't make much difference, but the name of the class as approved by the Board is “Hunting Rifle"

I am responsible for the confusion because postal match #21 which was exclusively for this class, until this 2010 season was named Light Production --by me.

There was a little confusion by older members who remembered when CBA had both a Light and Heavy Production for postal matches, which raised the question of the best name.

In my poll of the shooters that had been shooting in postal match #21, I asked what the name of the class should be and Hunting Rifle won.

Although a high power scope isn't appropriate for hunting deer or squirrels, it could be argued that it might be just right for hunting prairie dogs or winter fox hunting in open country.

As for myself. I plan to switch to the cheap 6-24X for matches and back to a 2-7X when I go after squirrels. That gives me the need to shoot a few zeroing shots twice a year and the excuse to go to the range and also shoot the bull with my friends. I have found that very little “zeroing” is needed, even with cheap Tasco (Weaver style) rings if both scopes are dedicated to the same rifle.

John

Attached Files

Lefty posted this 21 September 2010

Now that the season is pretty much over, has there been any feedback about the success of this class this year? I believe this is the first year a a two year trial period? I participated in the postal matches this summer and I thought the results were good but not so good as to discourage a new shooter wanting to get their toe wet in competition. After shooting Production, Heavy and Military for the past 15 years, I found it both interesting and challenging to make an unaltered standard weight rifle shoot well.

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 21 September 2010

I'm not sure you could enforce a ban on throating, because alot of the manufacturers do not follow SAAMI chamber specs.  Remington is famous on its proprietary cartridges for using a chamber design “which works” for its own production, and submitting the one which “doesn't” to SAAMI just to frustrate their competition. The .280 Remington, 7mm Express Remington and 7mm-08 Remington are prime examples. 

A clever fellow could get around a throating ban by fire lapping or picking a barrel which was worn from shooting alot of jacketed rounds.  Without a borescope, making chamber casts and having measuring equipment at the range a ban would be unenforceable.

It's too late to cry over spilt milk now, but Frank Marshall always thought that the great leveler would be to require that fixed ammunition be loaded into and fed from the magazine. If it is to be a hunting rifle match and not a hunter class benchrest match that would make sense.

A stab about how I would have structured it, if I had been asked to recall how Frank may have mused about it over creamed chipped beef served over buttered biscuits:

1) Any center-fire repeating magazine rifle, firing fixed ammunition, loaded and fed from the magazine, not exceeding 9 pounds in weight complete with iron sights, or telescopic sight not to exceed 24X.

2) No restriction as to caliber or size of cartridge, as long the rifle fires fixed ammunition assembled with cast lead bullets loaded into and fed from the magazine.

4) Barrel must 18 inches or longer and of unaltered factory external contour. Sportized military rifles must have their issue original barrel and may be shortened from the muzzle and be draw-filed or polished to remove lathe turning marks or contour steps only.

5) Iron sights may not contain any glass or plastic lenses, filters or leveling aids.

6) Stocks must be of wood. Glass or epoxy bedding, including insertion of metal pillars, V-blocks or laminated stocks are permitted.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

nimrod posted this 23 September 2010

After watching this new class for a while I thought that I might throw my 2 cents worth in. I really like the basic idea of this class but think that you might get more participation if it were called the “Hunter Class” and had a 9# limit with a 9 power scope limit. I feel that 9.5# and any scope still allows a lot of speciality rifles in the mix. I have a 700 VSSF that has a heavier barrel, fluted, and with the right scope I could shoot the “Light Production” class, but I would never take this rig deer hunting, too heavy too long and too much scope. I have talked to a few people at my home range about this class and to a person they made the comment that they would like to shoot their deer rifles but no way would they compete against a 40 power scope and they ain't going to change scopes just to shoot a target. At any rate I'm going to shoot this match next year at least in the postal's if for nothing else than to help keep this match going and hope that it draws enough shooters and interest to make the Natioals. Thanks Richard Missourians for Mosins

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 23 September 2010

Frank would have supported a 9X scope limit. Let the guys turn up their 3-9 variables, but no star gazing wonder glasses.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

Lefty posted this 24 September 2010

You know, I wonder about scope magnification. This past summer Wally Enga used a 6X scope on a Mosin to break some of the Region 5 Production class group records at 200 yards. I shot a 12X Leupold my first few years of competition and the only issue I had was seeing the bullet holes without a spotting scope. One of the top competitors is this summer's postal matches shot a 12X scope. I am not really sure that the typical hunting rifle is going to shoot well enough so that a 36X scope is mandatory to be competitive.

Attached Files

Tom Acheson posted this 24 September 2010

Lefty's earlier question above really gets to the heart of the new probationary BR rifle category...how is it doing in regards to interesting new shooters in giving the CBA BR program a try? We all have or own ideas about what the equipment limits should be or that the rules should be re-written. But when the CBA Board votes on making it an “official” BR match category, there will be statistics reviewed to see how well the Hunting Rifle event has been attended during the probationary period. What will be needed is feedback from those who actually enter the BR matches, not those who don't shoot the matches or frequently offer up excuses that they don't shoot but would if the rules were “just right". Guess what...we don't have a single rifle category where there is 100% consensus on the equipment rules but a lot of people enjoy shooting the game anyway!

We saw quite a few Hunting Rifle Postal match entrants in 2010 and there were (3) entrants in the National Tournament a couple weeks ago in Kansas City. Looks like it's off to a good start. Growth in participation over the next year will help determine if the class survives or drops by the wayside.

Tom

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 24 September 2010

Agree, you have to start somewhere.
See how it flies and adjust from there.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

CB posted this 27 September 2010

I think Ed's last comment is right on the money ”€œ “Agree, you have to start somewhere. See how it flies and adjust from there.”

To elaborate a bit on Tom's answer to Lefty we had 21 hunting rifle entries in various local and regional matches this past year, the first year as a probationary class. Additionally, overall postal match entries increased by 100 last year (11%) and half of that increase was due to entries in hunting rifle class.

Tom is right. “We don't have a single rifle category where there is 100% consensus on the equipment rules but a lot of people enjoy shooting the game anyway!”

A word about how we got the set of rules we have. The original draft brought together ideas from a small group of members that had been pushing for a class that would allow ordinary hunting rifles to be competitive as a low cost way for members to try competitive shooting. These were the folks that argued that board members should support the idea and did the work of scoring a postal match on a trail basis for four years. Those pushing a project get to make the original proposal.

Although all CBA members have had four years to express their opinions on the class rules while the postal matches were going on, the changes suggested during that time were finally decided by a poll sent to the actual participants in the postal matches. The issues of name of the class, weight limit, and scope power drew the most interest and although there were mixed opinions, on each issue, a clear majority of the shooters opted for “hunting rifle” 9.5 pounds, and high magnification scopes. Again we followed the principle that those who were actually participating should get to decide.

If the class is approved as an official class, the rules will probably again be modified, as we gain experience. Any CBA member may initiate such a change using the procedure in Article 14 of the rules of competition.

I think the class is off to a good start and I hope all of you, with or without opinions about a specific rule, will give it a try. You probably already have a competitive rifle.

John

Attached Files

Steel 13 posted this 30 November 2010

After reading through 5 pages of banter and rules, this is rather daunting, to step into this subject. I'm a new guy.I have never competed in any type of rifle shoot other than qualifications for the Army and the Sheriffs dept. I dont own any custom bench rest rifles,just deer rifles.So Production rifle, I'd guess is probably my only chance to shoot in a match. Perhaps one of the local fellows will take me under his wing and get me through a match.

Attached Files

nimrod posted this 30 November 2010

I am confussed also, I thought that there was going to be a Light Production class at the nationals. In “THE FOULING SHOT” on page 208-7 at the bottom there is a listing for the scores of the HNT # match. Is this the “light production” match with the above rules listed or is this more like the hunter match with the rules posted in the postal shoots? Just like to know? Thanks, Richard

Attached Files

muley posted this 30 November 2010

I can see this class can be confusing, but , don"t worry about the perfect gun. use your hunting rifle with your hunting scope and feel comfortable and relax. try to fit a bullet to the throat of your gun and work up a load. u will be surprised how well u and your gun will shoot. good luck.

Attached Files

billwnr posted this 30 November 2010

Steel13, come up to Kenmore for the March match and we'll get you help. 85 rounds of ammo should do it for sighters and score shots.

Attached Files

Steel 13 posted this 01 December 2010

billwnr wrote: Steel13, come up to Kenmore for the March match and we'll get you help. 85 rounds of ammo should do it for sighters and score shots. Thanks for the invite Bill. Hopefully I'm healed enough from my  knee surgery by then.

Attached Files

Lefty posted this 11 December 2010

There are 10” of fresh snow on the ground and it is still falling at 1” per hour. It is a great day to think about shooting cast. When I started shooting cast 15 years ago two gentlemen were kind enough to coach me so I was not so lost. The best part was that they did not agree on anything so I was always exposed to more than one opinion. with that in mind here is my advice to those reading this thread who would like to try their favorite hunting rifle.

Select a medium weight bullet for your caliber. The RCBS 165 sil is an example of a 30 cal bullet that shoots reasonably well in several of my unaltered rifles. a tapered bullet such as the Saeco 315 is another style which usually will shoot to 2 moa or less. You will be better off if the bullet is at least .3095 at the driving bands.

Attached Files

Lefty posted this 11 December 2010

Oops sorry, I ran out of space. Choose one or two “cast bullet” powders. I almost always start with 4759 but several others including Rx7, 5744, and 4198 frequently work. Load to a 1600 to 1750 fps velocity range. Clean your rifle very thoroughly and go shooting.

What is success? I marvel at the number of 1/2 inch guns mentioned on this sight but none of my hunting rifles will do that. 1 1/2 inches would have been competitive at the nationals. A 1” (on demand) hunting rifle is a real keeper in my world.

Have fun - it doesn't need to be rocket science.

Attached Files

6pt-sika posted this 23 April 2011

So “what is” the final etched in stone rules for this class ?

 

Weight , mods and scope power ?

Attached Files

pat i. posted this 24 April 2011

Etched in stone as of right now.

Hunting Rifle Class - A factory produced rifle manufactured in a quantity of at least 1,000 units over any 12 month period. Rifles produced by a manufacturer's custom shop are prohibited. Rifles using an original issue military action and barrel and meeting the Hunting Rifle Class weight limit are allowed. Factory sights may be removed, but all other parts, including detachable magazines, must be present and functional when the rifle is weighed or fired. Maximum weight is 9.5 lbs. (4.3 Kg.). Modifications judged to have been made specifically to allow the rifle to meet the weight limit are prohibited. The barrel may be shortened only from the muzzle to facilitate re-crowning, but the barrel's exterior contour may not be altered. The barrel must be chambered for its original cartridge, and the chamber, including the neck, must conform to SAAMI specifications. Factory action, barrel, stock, and trigger appropriate to the model, must be used. The trigger may be adjusted and the barreled action rebedded. Buttstocks may be shortened up to one inch to fit shooter but the factory stock contour may not be altered. Factory parts may be exchanged, however, a reconfigured rifle must duplicate a factory produced model. There are no restrictions on scope power. Alterations not specifically allowed above are prohibited.

Attached Files

tturner53 posted this 04 August 2011

I need a clarification on the latest(final?) Hunting Rifle class specs. In the latest TFS it has the proposed specs which says, ” ...or a surplus military rifle that has been for sale to the public.” Does this mean only factory sporters or just any milsurp that has been for sale to the public and then sporterised by whoever? My Hunting Rifle prospect is an 03a3, modified with sporter stock and meets all the other specs no problem. Probably not making the question clear, but what does it mean by “for sale to the public"? For sale when, before or after modification? Thanks. And by the way, great job on the cover photo Pat. Yet another very interesting issue of The Fouling Shot.

Attached Files

pat i. posted this 04 August 2011

Tim as long as the gun has the original barrel, action, trigger, meets weight with the magazine included (no single shots adaptions here), and has a stock with a forend skinnier than 2 inches and round on the bottom you're good to go. You could even replace the barrel on a worn out milsurp as long as it was with a surplus milsurp barrel proper to the gun in the right caliber. Doesn't matter who did the sporterizing or when.

Attached Files

6pt-sika posted this 04 August 2011

Okay the rule book says you have 10 minutes to shoot your 5 shots for score and sighters then 7 minutes before your next target . So it will take about an hour to shoot your 20 shots at 100 yards and then another hour to shoot your 20 shots at 200 yards . If I am reading this correctly .

 

Do you keep you're stuff at a bench until you've shot all you're 100 and 200 targets or do you have to move and let everyone shoot at 100 and then restart for 200 in a typical match ?

Attached Files

6pt-sika posted this 04 August 2011

A month or so ago I was working with a 444 lever to try and get it to what I thought was reasonable for a Light Hunter Match and was having problems with hot barrel !

But then I wasn't taking as long as what the rule book allows and the temps were in the high 90's !

Is there any stipulation on how you can or cannot cool your barrel in between targets ?

Attached Files

pat i. posted this 05 August 2011

Typically and according to the rules it should take a little over an hour each  to shoot the 100 and 200 yd portion of the match for 5 shot group and score and a bit longer for 10 shot groups because you get 15 minutes per target on the 10 shot groups. Some ranges I've been to are a little lax on the time between targets because of target changes and shooting the breeze. Since the target crew is most of the time made up of participating shooters some consideration has to be given to them for a little rest period and loading their ammunition if they load at the range.

Unless there's more shooters than benches (mostly only at the Nationals and some Regionals) you just leave everything where it's at and finish out the match at one station. If there's more shooters than benches and you get unlucky enough to have to move you'd shoot your four groups or score at one yardage and pull everything off so the guy sharing your bench could shoot theirs. Also at the Nationals you're assigned benches and rotate to another bench on the second day so one guy isn't sitting in a dead zone for the whole match because of a berm or some land feature while another guy is shooting through a howling wind. Some Regionals might do this too but I've never been to one that did that I remember.

As far as cooling the barrel some clubs don't allow you to be anywhere near you're gun while the target crew is down range, a smart idea, so that might be a problem. Again some are more lax on that. A fan or that air mattress pump I wrote about a while ago allows you to cool the barrel while not messing with the gun and might be an idea to look into so you wouldn't have any issues no matter where you were.

Maybe someone could get the Director of Registered Competition to chime in here if something I wrote isn't right. 

Attached Files

6pt-sika posted this 05 August 2011

pat i. wrote: As far as cooling the barrel some clubs don't allow you to be anywhere near you're gun while the target crew is down range, a smart idea, so that might be a problem. Again some are more lax on that. A fan or that air mattress pump I wrote about a while ago allows you to cool the barrel while not messing with the gun and might be an idea to look into so you wouldn't have any issues no matter where you were.

Maybe someone could get the Director of Registered Competition to chime in here if something I wrote isn't right. 

So then most folks do not clean their barrels after each 5 shot target ?

I was thinking in the 7 minutes target change I'd be able to give the barrel somewhat of a scrubbing and in the process it would help it cool some !

Attached Files

pat i. posted this 05 August 2011

That's all going to depend on where you shoot. Most ranges allow it but I wanted it understood that some might not. I think you'd have your biggest problem at a national if the range officer isn't a CBA member. You could just finish your group before the time expires and clean then which is what some guys do. 10 or 15 minutes is a pretty long time to shoot 5 or 10 shots.

I personally don't clean between relays but for the most part I don't clean at any time. I'd rather be flapping my trap for the seven minutes than cleaning a gun and once I get home there's always something more exciting to do like working on the indentation in my recliner.

Attached Files

tturner53 posted this 05 August 2011

With so much said over a long period this thread can be confusing. To me, anyway. In case I'm not alone: “Hunting Rifle Class” is not a specific match, not that I know of. It is a class of rifles allowed in certain matches. I'm talking about postal matches here, don't know about what's in the shoulder to shoulder matches. According to my 2011 Postal Match Guide and schedule the following matches have a “Hunting Rifle” class; #1-Winter Benchrest, #2-Winter Offhand(any rifle is allowed), #4-Spring Ice Breaker, #5-Spring Warm-up BR, #6-Season BR, #9-Season Offhand(any rifle), #12-Little-Bore BR,  #17-Deer Hunter Practical (see specs-any commercial hunting rifle...mil. sporter) #18 200-Yard Combined, . A few of these matches don't have a specific “Hunting Rifle” class but one would be allowed. There are a couple more matches that a “Hunting Rifle” could be used in but don't have a “H.R.” class specifically. Great idea having this class, lots of opportunities to get out and have some fun.

Attached Files

Tom Acheson posted this 05 August 2011

The rule modification in the recent FS is still unofficial. The Board will vote on it Kansas City in early Sept. At our clubs in Minnesota this summer, we've had some shooters trying this new rifle class out and are enjoying it. Three of our 13 shooters at last weekend's Regional were shooting Hunter class. These are shooters who have been shooting Heavy and Production in previous matches. The most often heard comment is.."I can't get thing to shoot because its too light (weight)....

It will be interesting to see how participation levels look a year from now.

Attached Files

PETE posted this 07 August 2011

Awwww.... Geeeeee...... And here I was hoping my Win. Mod. 70 .375 H&H Mag. would be legal.... he said with tongue in cheek. :)

Pete

Attached Files

6pt-sika posted this 14 August 2011

PETE wrote: Awwww.... Geeeeee...... .... he said with tongue in cheek. :)

Pete Kinda smarts (I would think) if you bite down when you pull the trigger .>

Attached Files

madsenshooter posted this 19 August 2011

I read this entire post, guess I should've been following along earlier. One thing that caught my attention was someone asking “What's to stop someone from shooting an AR". Why should anyone want to stop anyone from shooting an AR? I built one that won't make this class, because of weight, caliber(6x45), and an Obermeyer barrel. But I'm assuming an AR with a .223 upper will. Maybe we should consider an AR class with small, medium, and large bore divisions. Because of all the stuff available for the little black things maybe it ought to be anything goes, as long as it's an AR. Here's how my adventures in ARdom are thus far going: http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=121224>http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=121224

Attached Files

billwnr posted this 23 August 2011

It will fall in either Heavy or Unlimited class. Heavy is up to 14 lbs and Unlimited is restricted to being able to carry it to the bench.

Attached Files

linoww posted this 27 August 2011

if you bring any rifle and cast bullets to a CBA match there is a class for you.Too many sub classes split it up too much in my opinion.There are pump lever auto postals for those that you could shoot it in.

"if it was easy we'd let women do it" don't tell my wife I said that!

Attached Files

Lefty posted this 28 August 2011

madsenshooter I am not a black rifle fan but I have to be impressed by the work you have done with yours. It doesn't really matter that we don't have black rifle classes in our matches. Your results will show in the FS regardless of the official class. Good luck and good work.

Attached Files

linoww posted this 29 August 2011

Madsenshooter-

are the .223 AR's pretty reliable and accurate with cast? it would be fun to shoot one in Production Class

An AR15 postal would be an interesting one as well

George

"if it was easy we'd let women do it" don't tell my wife I said that!

Attached Files

madsenshooter posted this 04 September 2011

Lefty, thank you for your comments. It's still a work in progress, and now I have a 223 upper that I can shoot Hunter Class with. George, as long as you pay attention to bullet fit and reloading technique, as you would with any cast project, they are quite accurate. I'm interested in your friend who shoots sans lube. When you get down to these small bores, you're dealing with lands that are only a couple thousandths tall. In the case of my 6x45, I'm also dealing with a fast twist and radiused rifling. I think in this case the standard lubes we use are a bit much. After all I'm desperately trying to get the bullet to get a bite on those radiused lands, waxes dripping out the end of the barrel probably isn't too conducive to accomplishing that. So, I've got some bullets with the 6x45 that I simply dipped the bands in LLA for lube. I'll load em up and see how it works at high velocity before long.  Oh, reliability.  I have a valve that allows me to turn off the gas system, and in CBA matches, it's a straight pull.  If I had it to do again, I'd use a carbine length gas system with that same adjustment valve.  Reliable function for about any cast bullet load could then be found.  With my rifle length tube, I need some powder volume and pressure to make things work semi-auto.

Attached Files

Categories
Search
Popular Tags
This Weeks High Earners
Hot Topics
Close