Did Copper ever make the required 100 units in a 12-month period to make them legal in Production or Hunter class?
Cooper rifles in Prod?
- 333 Views
- Last Post 6 days ago
723 rifles in 2020.
Production class is 1000 per year. Not 100 so it would appear to be a no go.
In 2015 Cooper produced 2165 rifles but there is no model breakdown. The way I read the rules, to be legal in Production it would have to be 1000 units of that particular model in a 12-month period. It is not clear to me if all the variants of a certain model can be lumped together.
To me, this means the action types are the qualifiers. As an example, the Remington 700 Long and Short actions plus the Savage 110 and 10 actions are marketed in many variations. If we draw down to where we require each variation to be a counting unit, then we'll not have any qualifying rifles.
My Remington VSSF and VLS serial numbers start again each year with a letter code, hard to determine from serial number. They are both the same rifle for chambering, barrel length, and weight. They are both competitive until 12,000 rounds, possibly even to 20,000 rounds. But neither is a Remington 40X that starts life from the same forging as the Remington 700 and to me is another action type.
When the weight limit for Production rifles was 10 1/2 pounds, I owned a Savage 110S .308 Winchester with Weaver 36X scope that barely made that weight limit. People with Remington 788 rifles in .308 Winchester were winning most of the time with lighter rifles. (I walked eight miles of tables at the old Pomona Gun Show to find it one Friday late afternoon after work. I found it three tables from the door, If I had gone to the right instead of the left, I'd have been out of there three hours sooner. The seller wanted $125.00 less than what would have been my initial offer.)
My CPA Stevens 44 1/2 actions were bought a year apart with the serial numbers less than one hundred numbers apart. This clearly is not a Production model.
Common sense and not some adverse strict interpretation of the rules must prevail. We do this for fun. As I noted above with the 110S, where I was close the the edge of the rules, I still regularly was beaten by a cheaper rifle. I just hunkered down and concentrated more on learning to read the conditions at each range.
Farm boy from Illinois, living in the magical Pacific Northwest
Just a few questions...
Who determined the 1,000 unit requirement.....and why?
Do we believe the manufacturing stats that we see published, what is the maker's benefit to telling the world that data?
I agree with Bud, the wide variety of specialized models offered by a maker may not rise to the level of meeting the flawed 1,000 unit thing. So the logic in singling out a specific maker is what?
As a Match Director, if a shooter shows up with a bolt action rifle that is as manufactured, unaltered, makes weight, etc. I'm letting him shoot. The CBA needs shooters!
Who at the other end....Ed, website guys, Glenn...will study match results looking for 1,000 unit violaters?
That rule needs to be dropped!
Easy to criticize, even be scornful of a rule. Much harder to write them.
I didn't invent the 1,000 rule. I believe it has been in the production rules a long time. Imperfect as it is and maybe impossible to enforce, I plead guilty of putting it in the Hunting Rifle class rules. My motive was to at least show that the class was intended for off the shelf Remchester hunting rifles like most hunters carry.
There are several semi production, semi custom makers, some even using their own actions that turn out super accurate varmint and hunting rifles for a few thousand dollars. Hart hand lapped barrels, benchrest quality chambers, three hundred dollar triggers, etc. Some of them make quite a few rifles/per year but short of customized to you arm length etc. Ed Shilen used to produce such rifles and there others that my memory won't retrieve.
The motive for putting the 1,000 rule in HR was to at least indicate what the intent and the spirit of the class was hoped to be and maybe scare off those who are always looking trying to turns things into an expensive equipment race.
We don't want to go there but the hangdgun silhouette crowd had for a brief period, a retail price limit. This applied to the Production and Revolver categories. Later it was found out that this was aimed at Freedom Arms revolvers. They were the most expensive compared to S&W and Ruger...but...the guy running the silhouette game at the time had store. You could buy lots of silhouette related things from the store. He wanted Freedom Arms to give him a price break so he could stock and sell their revolvers. Freedom didn't play along. So for people to shoot a revolver in Production or Revolver category they could not use a Freedom Arms revolver due to it's price being beyond the retail price limit. You could shoot it in Unlimited category but you wouldn't be competitive going up against guns like the XP-100. Eventually that corrupt rule was dropped.
I wasn't thinking about John when I asked the question, sorry if I offended you. I just thought it would be a tough rule to enforce. There would be arguments between people agreeing on the 1,000 limit. However, high magnification scopes are not what a lot of (not all) traditional hunting rifles are equipped with. That any scope allowance rule is more impactful than production quanitites is, my opinion. I like the 6X limit in Military.
I agree with John, writing fool-proof rules cannot be done.
Years ago when I went prarie dog shooting....you didn't hunt them, you knew where they were and they wouldn't be leaving....there were 4 of us. Doug and I cleaned everyone's rifle during our breaks. One of the shooters had a Cooper in .223. Nice rifle, he hit a lot of dogs. We used to kid him when gun cleaning....we'd ask him if he brought some Pledge with him, furniture polish. He really liked the wood on his Cooper. We'd tell him that the gun wasn't clean until we spiffed-up the wood!
I wasn't offended. You know I would have resigned 20 years ago if I hadn't had a thick hide.
I was just trying to point out that the 1,000 rule may be useful as a guideline even though the information is hard to get and the thing is unenforceable. It must sort of work. At least, I don't know of any semi production by high grade rifles used in that class. The imperfect rule will have to do until someone comes up with a better solution.
As for the forever complaint on the scopes. They don't cause a money based equipment race. I and other have proven you can be competitive in that class at the nationals with a $99 Simmons 24X or a 6X. It is the one class we have where the shooter is the most important part.
The 1,000 units rule must be working if people are willing to waste electrons arguing about it. Personally, I think that some who are willing to argue about something as inconsequential as this are only looking for an advantage to be had over the other shooters in the class, and I stopped reading the CBA forum because I hate to plow through nothing but rule "discussions". They are there for a reason, if you want to change them there are procedures for that, but why get wound up about some dumb rule in "Hunters Class"?
- All Categories
- General Polls
- Contact Us w/ Forum Issues
- Welcome to The Cast Bullet Association Forum
- Bullet Casting
Guns and Shooting
- AR Platform
- TC Contenders & Other Single Shot Handguns
- Informal Matches & Other Shooting Events
- Gunsmithing Tips
- Gun Cleaning & Maintenance
- Benchrest Cast Bullet Shooting
- Military Bench Rest Cast Bullet Shooting
- Silhouette Shooting
- Postal Match Cast Bullet Shooting
- Factory Guns
- Black Powder Cartridge
- Hand Guns
- Lever Guns
- Single Shot Rifles
- Bolt Action Rifles
- Military Surplus Rifles
- Plinkers Hollow
- Buy, Sell or Trade
- Other Information & Reference