Do you support 3 F-Classes?

Do you support a 3rd F-Classification?

  • Total voters
    76
O

Obtunded

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 95.2%
40   2   0
Location
Chase BC
George Farquarhson started F ("F" for Farquarhson) class in Canada to allow older shooters to remain competitive by creating a class that allowed them to mount a scope and bipod onto their Target Rifles. It retained the technical rules in all other respects (bullet weights).

It has since exploded in popularity and evolved to allow an open class where weights, calibers and trigger weights are much more liberal.

Do you support the 3rd class, "F-Restricted" (Any 223 or 308 bullet weight) in addition to the 81/156 grain 223/308 class?
 
Obtunded is correct, George Farquarhson started F Class as a place for old TR shooters to go before they died.:p There are more new shooters going into F Class than Old TR shooters going over to the dark side in their later years.
Canada or should I say the DCRA always went with the rules laid down by Mother England when it came to Target Shooting. The reason for this was that Canada sends a TR team to Bisley every year so you need to keep the rules the same.
As F Class if fairly new (less than 20 years old) things like rules need to evolve. Not everyone wants to shoot a plain old .308 with 155 gr bullets off a bipod and shoot the odd 4 or 3 when they are caught not paying attention to the wind. But then not everyone can fork out $500-$600 for a barrel every year just to stay near the top of the prize list.

In TR we are no longer shooting #4's with issued ammo (thankfully) so rules there have been evolving with every new gadget that hits the market.

The way I see it, the more people you get out shooting with whatever they have in their gun safe now, the more potential members you have to draw from. If you need to have a class that involves shooting only pop cans at 1000 yards and their are enough shooters willing to pay an entry fee, we should have a class for them.

Just my 2 cents, but what do I know, I'm a TR shooter.
 
Ok, I voted yes. I'm so new at this I almost didn't vote, but here's my thinking: As long as F(F) doesn't get absorbed by the proposed new class, I'm ok with it. The reason being that if someone has the world's supply of money to spend on new toys, fine, let them compete with like-walleted people. I just don't want to see it become a "best gun wins" thing.
Some of us are on a very small budget indeed.
 
stevebc said:
Ok, I voted yes. I'm so new at this I almost didn't vote, but here's my thinking: As long as F(F) doesn't get absorbed by the proposed new class, I'm ok with it.
Click to expand...

Steve, I am glad you did vote. It doesn't matter how new or how old you are at this, if you are interested in it and care about it, you ought to be heard from.

Personally, I would like to see the two classes (F/F and F/Restricted) resolve their differences by merging, since I believe there is much less difference between them than meets the eye. In fact, I am prepared to argue (somewhere else, and not right now!) that there is so little competitive advantage to be gained by allowing "any bullet weight" in .308 (with some minor exceptions), that one could merge these two classes and have a fair contest. That is, obviously, a position that needs some selling first though.

The reason being that if someone has the world's supply of money to spend on new toys, fine, let them compete with like-walleted people. I just don't want to see it become a "best gun wins" thing.
Some of us are on a very small budget indeed.
Click to expand...

It is already the case that in any F-class category, you need to have an absolutely first rate rifle in order to be competitive. This is because there are many other very good shooters in the game who have first-rate rifles and first rate skill, and F Class is a game in which both of the qualities shine through. So there really is no difference in the level of cost or technical sophistication in a first-rate F/Open rifle, or F/Farquharson rifle, or F/Restricted rifle - you need absolutely first rate kit in order to win.

(Iron-sighted Target Rifle is only slightly less demanding of equipment. You can win a national champioship with a rifle that isn't _quite_ fully as accurate as a first-rate F/O, F/R or F/F rifle. But I will point out that a good many top TR rifles are amazingly accurate)

Neither F-Class nor TR are a "best gun wins" game, nor is there any danger of them being so; you've got to be the best shooter in order to win a serious match. Having said that, you can't win with mediocre equipment. (The good news is that while first-rate equipment might be quite demanding to build and keep operating well, it isn't really much more expensive dollar-wise.)
 
I too voted no, it will only dilute our numbers

All the FClasses are "supported", in the rear by a rear bag, and the front by a rest or a bipod.

At our club, at the bigger shoots :( adding yet another "supported" class may make 3 new guys in F/TR(if we can draw them), 6 guys in F(F), and 7 guys in F(O). A 1st and 2nd in two classes and 1st in the new class. To further brake things down, last year a few asked me to look at classifications for our FClass shooters. This would make 4 shooter classifications(Master, Export, Sharpshooter and Green Shot) for all classes as well. You would need 3 classes * 4 shooter classifications=12 medals/trophies and you give out what? Hopefully 12 1st place's? Now if you add in the 3-6-9 rule for trophies, no one gets anything, well maybe one guy if there were 3 in his class & classification which is not likely with these numbers! And the club shelves 11 medals, hopefully un-engraved???

Since HR's bipod is as solid as a rest (and I think some F/TR shooters maybe using the HR too) I would support F/TR adopting the F(F) rules myself since it would be shooter against shooter with equal BCs, be it supported by a rest or a bipod. I know of one F(F) shooter that uses lighter bullets at the close ranges thus losing BC(and gaining velocity) to other F(F) shooters that use the 155 at all ranges. I too think these two classes should merge and iron out their minor differences...

* F(F) could drop "or front rest" and uses any bullet weight they want ... and thus dying as the original class OR
* F/TR should add the clause "or front rest" plus add the bullet weight rule and evolving as a class

Eventually, I hope we have the numbers in all our classes to use the 4 shooter classification system in all FClasses, whatever they maybe, at least at the national level.
 
Last edited:
Dan hit the nail on the head... I think that rather than create another classification, simply bite the bullet and create an amalgam of the non-open classes. I support the old F-TR out of a sense of nostalgia, but in reality, how many TR shooters switch to F?

I also think Dan is Bang on ( no pun intended) in regards to the potential advantages with bullet weights. As a wise man once said, beware of the man with only one rifle, for he knows how to use it. If you know your load and can read wind, you'll win. I think it is counter-productive to emphasize differences in equipment.

People speak in terms of "attracting new shooters", well if the classification system becomes too complicated, it may well shy people away.

I will live and work within whatever system we have. Truth be known, shrinking the number of shooters I have to compete against in F-Open by sending them over to F-R will make my odds better, but the most important thing is the sport provide an opportunity for people to compete, be successful and have fun. Maybe this is the answer, I don't know.

I reiterate that I think the best way to open the doors to new shooters is to formally adopt a factory/sporter class that allows only factory rifles. Once a shooter participates for the first time, the knowledge he/she will acquire and the confidence they will have will let them decide what and if they wish to buy/build to participate in a formal class. This may not be within the purview of the DCRA, but it certainly should be at the Provincial level.
 
Provincially sanctioned 3rd classification in F-class

Obtunded said:
I reiterate that I think the best way to open the doors to new shooters is to formally adopt a factory/sporter class that allows only factory rifles. Once a shooter participates for the first time, the knowledge he/she will acquire and the confidence they will have will let them decide what and if they wish to buy/build to participate in a formal class. This may not be within the purview of the DCRA, but it certainly should be at the Provincial level.
Click to expand...

The ORA has sanctioned such a classification.. F(M). We have many new shooters joining our organization after attending our training courses, with these "factory" type rifles.

From the ORA website..
F(M) – “Mass-Produced” Rifles

This class will be restricted to mass-produced rifles of any calibre (see limits in F(O)) that can be purchased readily at many gun shops and that have not been customized to improve ballistic performance. F(M) is for people shooting ‘out-of-the-box’ rifles; Remington, Winchester, Ruger, Savage, Tikka, Browning, Sako or similar, using the original manufacturers parts. Some ‘adjustments’ are permitted, but not the replacement of parts.

The rules governing F(M) qualified rifles have been devised to create a low cost class for competitors and in the recognition that the majority of mass-produced rifles are not capable of accuracy equal to the sophisticated F(O) class rifles chambered in custom, wildcat or specialist calibres.

1. The rifle must be ‘as manufactured’ and available in quantity, as described in the manufacturers catalogue (i.e. mass produced). This excludes specialist TR guns or Bench Rest actions, wildcat calibres and custom built guns. There is no restriction on the type of rifle that can be used; bolt action, falling block, lever action or semi-automatic rifles are acceptable.

2. It must have the original manufacturers barrel.

3. It must have the original trigger (which can be adjusted or tuned).

4. It must have the original stock (which can be reshaped).

5. It must have the original chamber (no re-working or improving).

6. It can be any calibre (subject to range rules).

7. It can be bedded and floated in the original stock.

8. The barrel can be re-crowned.

9. It can have any type of sight system.

10. As in F(O) class, any type of front and rear rests may be used.

11. Factory or hand loaded ammunition may be used.

If other PRA's would like to sanction such rifles, maybe they could use something like the ORA's and we could eventually have a nationally recognized Factory class we could compete in interprovincially and, if the DCRA picked it up, at national level competitions.

NormB
 
Hi Norm,

I was aware that Ontario has the M class and I think it is fantastic. Some club-level matches in BC have a sporter class, but it isn't universal. I did wonder how you handle the 40X and Savage F-CLass factory guns...

Oh well... one day perhaps.
 
Obtunded said:
Hi Norm,

I was aware that Ontario has the M class and I think it is fantastic. Some club-level matches in BC have a sporter class, but it isn't universal. I did wonder how you handle the 40X and Savage F-CLass factory guns...

Oh well... one day perhaps.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't the 40X be considered "Custom" as it come from the Rem Custom Shop.

The Savage OTOH might be considered a "mass produced" rifle.
 
F(M) Class

I thank Norm for his clear and precise definition of F(M) Class.

To go from an ORA "Intro" day experience to activily competeing in ORA matches you have to start with the F(M) Class. If you find that you don't like the sport, you sell the factory rifle with a little depreciation. If you are enthused by the sport, you perfect the skills required, and step up to another class.

Two years ago my better half and myself attended a ORA "Intro" day. She started shooting with a Tikka T3 in 6.5 x 55 Sweedish, and a fixed 10 power scope. This allows her to shoot at any distance (300 - 1000 yards) and compete fairly against all other competitors in the F(M) Class regardless of previous experience.

I on the other hand took the TR route, with a ORA "Economy" rifle in the first year, and upgraded to a Robertson custom rifle in the second year.

The skills we both learned in the first year gave us the confidence to go to Barbados (for a practice) and then onto Jamaica earlier this year to compete in the Carribean Regionals. My better half borrowed a factory Sako in .308, and was one of the first to compete in the Carribean Regional in F Class.

The moral of the story is that the ORA by allowing shooters to compete in a F(M) class results in more shooters participating in the sport of target shooting, and that is one of the ways to sustain and develop the sport.

Steve
 
In our small matches, we run an unlimited class - basiclly run what ya brung, as well as a TR class.
Seems to work, because even though there are some very high dollar rigs that so up , the shooters that win are the more experienced ones , whether they are shooting an older gun or a new spanker!

However, if I ever do get into sanctioned F Class ( and we will up here) we will do with the current APRA rules, whatever they may be at the time...
Cat
 
Hi David, the APRA will run per the DCRA as usual, this means ICFRA et al. You gents going to be able to get down to Homestead in '09? I heard the oil patch is dying (although I haven't seen it in my racket) maybe you'll have some free time.

Cheers, Glen
 
Inspector said:
Hi David, the APRA will run per the DCRA as usual, this means ICFRA et al. You gents going to be able to get down to Homestead in '09? I heard the oil patch is dying (although I haven't seen it in my racket) maybe you'll have some free time.

Cheers, Glen
Click to expand...

Goiing down this spring for sure!
The patch ain't dead, it's just taken a bit of a breather!!:D
Cat
 
I voted No, adding a 3rd class simply splits up a class that is already way too small.
As I have expressed in the other post, I believe that all F class 308/223 shooters should be included in one class.
To exclude a shooter because his rifle may not exactly fit the rules of "FF class" makes no sense to me.
And to force a forerest shooter, to buy a top of the line bipod makes no sense.
And I do believe that the shooters who are bound and determined to have
"THE BEST" rifle, will not be satisfied with either FF or F/R, but instead they will build an F/O rifle. And it wont be in 308.
So i dont forsee certain shooters showing up at the events with full blown F/O rifles chambered in 308 just so they can win the FF/FR class.
So my suggestion is to simply combine the rules of the FF and FR classes,
any rest, any bullet, and have fun.
Cheers to all.
 
windborne11 said:
to simply combine the rules of the FF and FR classes,
any rest, any bullet, and have fun.
Cheers to all.
Click to expand...


Totally agree with you Windborne11 in everything you said, esp the quoted part.

My question now, how many of these guys "shoot the game" FF or F/TR or FO that voted?
I know some names, not all myself. I shoot FF and FO myself at 4 different PRA ranges
(MPRA, SPRA, APRA & BCRA) Just wondering...
 
Last edited:
First of all I have always found the DCRA to be ahead of UK as far as being progressive in TR rules.

Second I think there should be one F class (with classifications, like tr) and if you can whip the big boys butt with a 155 then so be it, you win! Simple.

No choice for this in the poll.
 
I'm with Dan on this one. I'll happily run my bipod against the front rest guys. I'm also happy too shoot the 155.5 Bergers against whatever somebody else wants to run. If I can negotiate CFRC's after already going to FCWCs next summer, I'll likely shoot whichever class has the better numbers, and I'll do it w/ 155.5's...
 
yes;

But in my opinion,

F(M) - for "mass-produced rifles" - to introduce and capture new shooters(and get those guys with varmint rifles out shooting!) - rules as previously outlined by NormB

F(TR) - as is now, .223/.308 cals - with 81/156 gr bullet weight restrictions - as per true TR - compete on relatively level playing field where skills win the match!

F(O) - open class or "arms race" class - including .223/.308 cal with unrestricted bullets weights.

....and that's my $0.02
 
I'm not sure I like how target shooting at longer range is turning into an equipment race... kind of like benchrest.

I kind of miss the old days when just about everybody shoot with similar rifle, using the same ammo. It was more a test of the shooters skills then a test of the shooters equipment.

Just my 2 cents,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom