New ICFRA Target Dimensions vs Present DCRA/US Targets

Boys, Boys, Boys, take a step back for a second, the only thing ICFRA has anything to do with is the International stuff. Really, the only thing that it affects is Bisley, South Africa, Australia, Canada (only at Connaught) etc, once every two or three years for the F Class Worlds. Even when we do adopt ICFRA rules, it's no big deal as the DCRA rules, with a small exception or two, are the ICFRA rules anyway.

We still run our own deal Provincially, so we can do pretty much what the PRA executive allows. The biggest pissing match is always going to be with the TR guys that don't want to have to put up with a two dimension target situation. This won't change until the PRA's President position is filled by an F Class shooter. We're growing even further apart. I don't think it has much, if anything, to do with ICFRA. I think it's more of us versus them popping up.

There, I feel much better now. It's amazing what a good diatribe can do for brainular distractive disordrer.

Cheers, Glen
 
Actually Glenn, I'm not particularly worried about very much. The targets are a no biggie at all; I can shoot at anything (I can't always hit it however) and you're right... the PRA's hold the cards when it comes to mapping out how we will conduct our own matches and shooting. Since I can't afford 5 grand to go to Ottawa, they can shoot muskets at truffles while wearing kilts for all I care.

It is unfortunate that we cannot seamlessly conduct a PRA match to an international standard and have everybody happy with it. I'm not happy about the third class of rifle though... not needed. 90 grain 224's and 210 grain 308's can compete in open class. It SOUNDS like this is one area the PRA's are going to say no.
 
Hi Ian, I'm sort of like Bill when it comes to all the rules and the way people insist on pushing the evolution of a sport. I'm just happy to keep shooting. It really doesn't matter at what, because we're all trying to hit the same target.

Cheers, Glen
 
I agree with most of the sentiment here that smaller dimensions are a natural progression in the long range rifle games.

The only concern I have is the possible decrease in participation due to the requirement to hold separate F class shoots (unlikely in smaller clubs and PRAs) from the TR lads due to targetry differences.

Better to have the same TR bull, inner etc. (ICFRA/DCRA/Whatever) and two different Vs, with a TR V indicated as usual and a F class V indicated in the top right corner of the frame.

Then we could continue to shoot together on the same target face.
 
Rules, rules, rules. Reminds me of the George Carlin bit where he describes the differences between good rules and bad rules. A good rule is, "don't stick your arm out the window." "Why?" "Because a passing car could rip it off." A bad rule is, "Don't run in the house." Why? "Because I said so." Good rules can improve our shooting experience while bad rules may drive some away.

We shouldn’t be afraid of the F-Class evolultion but suggested changes should be thoughtful. The F-Class director, the guy who is paid the big bucks, may then make informed decisions. Remember it wasn’t that long ago the TR boys were shooting Lee Enfields with issued sights and military ball ammo.

Regards

Aubrey
 
I think the biggest threat to decreased participation is taking the fun out of it. I agree that TR and F should shoot together and it would even be nice to see the Tac shooting guys out in greater numbers with their rigs too.


There should be rules, but they should be common sense and they should be fair.

With Cadets nowhere near as active with their rimfire or centerfire shooting, the next crop of shooters has to come from somewhere, and it is up to each of us to mentor the next shooter to take our place. (I've been dying to try shooting a TR rig, but you know, in spite of some pretty loud hints, nobody has offered to let me try theirs... maybe they're afraid I'll split their fancy jacket :))
 
Last edited:
While I hate seperate squadding between TR and F Class it has come to the point were it may be necessary. I did a bit of shooting in the US this past year and they don't seem to have any problems between TR and F Class. However their shooting is done single string. In Canada or the UK where shooting 2 or 3 to a target all that needs to be done as far as target changes go is a face change depending on if the shooters are TR or F Class. A quick staple job and a few extra hole to patch once the target is change back isn't really that big of a deal.

As long as everyone shooting in that class is shooting at the same target face and the V or X is still in the middle, who cares what you shoot at. The target that we shoot at must only be 2 things a) easy enough to be able to shoot a perfect score. b) difficult enough that a perfect score isn't too easy.

For the local shooter (Club Shooter) that is not interested in Provincial, National or International competition smaller target dimensions may turn a few off.

Obtunded, come out to Ontario we will find a jacket to fit you and even loan you a Target Rifle with iron sights.
 
Ian aka Obtunded, same offer exists at Nokomis and it is a whole lot closer, Just email ahead of time so I can make sure the rifle and ammo are there when you come. As far as the jackets goes, there is always a few hanging in the clubhouse for greenshots.
 
Right on Keith!

Have you guys got your schedule planned for your Nokomis shoots next year? I plan to make the journey, I'm told its a must-do trip. I'm gonna drag that hose-bag Richard with me too, although he doesn't know it yet.
 
Kodiak99317 said:
Ian aka Obtunded, same offer exists at Nokomis and it is a whole lot closer, Just email ahead of time so I can make sure the rifle and ammo are there when you come. As far as the jackets goes, there is always a few hanging in the clubhouse for greenshots.
Click to expand...

Jacket, slings and irons....sounds like a party waiting to happen.
Do I need to bring my Depends? :D
 
SPRA Dates for 2009

The match dates for 2009 are:



April 25 and 26/09.,. Work weekend/Club match
May 2 and 3/09 .,.,., Work party on Saturday\Open house - club match
May 16, 17, 18/09 .,. Victoria Day Match
June 6 and 7/09 ,.,., Saskatchewan Long Range Competition
June 20 and 21/09 .,. ISSF (ISU) and Drillers F Class Match/TR Palma
July 17, 18, 19/09 ,. SASKATCHEWAN PROVINCIAL CHAMPIONSHIP MATCH
August 15 and 16/09,. Long Range Challenge
September 5, 6 & 7/09 PPRA

For rounds needed and yardages see the SPRA site at www.saskrifle.ca and click the programs and matches link and the match of interest

(Note: Match detail not yet added but should follow last years match format so just look up last years match on this site and you should be good to go...or check the site closer to the date of interest, s/b there by then, I'm not the webmaster for the site, just the messenger... and also, Bill (HPBT) and Brian (Blackdiamond) are planning something for out there too with moving deer targets and that is NOT on the SPRA site, but they will post it here on GNuts I'm sure so look for that one too, Bill was talking some team and top shooter type things tonight in my garage over coffee, bigger entry fees but big payouts etc and a BBQ too, and at strange shooting distances, like 340 yds off partners shoulder or 825 yds kneeling, etc... should be a hoot too)

Rich, bring heavy rocks for your pockets, your a lighter guy, Ian should be ok :) watch now that I say this, the day you come it will be like only one other day I have ever seen out there, dead calm. 1 thing to always bring, rain gear and sun gear and bug juice and water for on the line and extra rounds if you want to "go long" like 1100, 1200, (berms stop at 1200) or 1500 (can be done prone) or 1700+ (off your trucks box bed)!

Sorry for getting off topic.... here, the official ICFRA site, just to get back on topic eh...
This is the official site of I.C.F.R.A (International Confederation of Fullbore Rifle Associations)
http://www.icfra.com/index.html
 
Last edited:
I want to resurrect this thread a bit and get some feedback. There has been in interesting turn of events and the BCRA short-range target has come out with the V-Bull being a scant 35mm. This works out to about .4 MOA, not the .5 MOA that was touted for many months leading up to this point.

BCRA says this is essentially the direction they got from ICFRA, ICFRA says they are still waiting for a concensus to make a final decision (After the FCWC in July '09).

CyaN1de and I have shot the new 35mm target and we did well, BUT conditions were perfect. Since then, a number of older F-Class shooters are rather upset about the dimensions, citing - among other things - the fact that it can be impossible to center a 1/4 or 1/8 moa scope adjustment on a .4 MOA target.... good point.

I guess I am hoping that those who shoot F-Class will take a stand and tell the DCRA what you want to be the final official short-range target to be.

In BC, we have no ranges longer than 600M, so the sirt range targets are important.
 
First off I am not an F Class shooter, I am a TR shooter. Target dim really don't mean much as long as everyone that day is shooting at the same size target, and the V Bull is still in the middle. At the end of the day/agg the person with the most shots closest to the middle will still be the winner, right?
One of the things about F Class and TR is that it is not scored by group size, meaning measuring the overall size of the group and subtracting the bullet dia. So as long as you break the line of the scoring ring you are awarded the higher value. The entire shot does not have to be inside the lines to get the higher value.
 
I agree with maynard, and whatever size it becomes is better than the massive V bull we shoot at now.

35 millimeters = 1.37795276 inches
US Fclass 300 yd target is 1.42" for the X ring
1.42 / 3.141 = .452085 moa for the US Fclass 300 yd target <----- under 1/2 moa here too!

300 meters = 328.08399 yards
1.047(moa)*3.2808399 = 3.435039" for a true MOA at 300M
The DCRA 300M V bull for TR is 3.125" or
3.125 / 3.435039 = .909742 moa for the TR V bull at 300M now....

1.37795276(35mm) / 3.435039(moa at 300M) = .401146 moa
So yes it is more like .4 moa for the 300M target.

Regardless of the size, we all would be using the same target so it is a moot point IMO. And we will never get the center changed out to white IMO. It was tried at one of the World Fclass matches (South Africa I think) and the white caused problems too for the US shooters - ask Larry B. about that one. Plus by keeping it black, the TR shooter can still put one on our targets (crossfire), as can we!

I will shoot whatever size it ends up being, I just do not expect to come off clean too often anymore! I think it is still a good thing, the smaller V bull. We could classify the FClass shooters too by eliminating the extra point we get for a V bull and make it just a 5, then we can use the existing DCRA classification breakdowns and have Master, Expert and SS type F Class shooters (after a year of firing on this target).

Keith in Sask
 
Kieth, The classification system is being discussed. Also, at the end of the day I too will shoot at whatever I'm asked to shoot at and we have proven that perfect possibles are still achievable on the new 35mm target, with good equipment.

Maynard, the fundamental difference in aiming between F and TR is that you center on the outside edge of the target (A point driven home when TR shooters insisted that the target numbers be removed from the target faces as it made the target board look lop-sided) whereas F-Classers using 42X scopes are aiming - literally - within the borders of that V-Bull. When you use a black reticle on a black target with the scoring rings covered by black patches in mirage... oh, and the entire V-Bull is now smaller than the plastic shot marker, it creates frustration. The same issues affecting us are simply not a factor in TR Shooting. How you guys do as well as you do with your rigs just blows me away (and I still hope some TR shooter will let me try a TR rig!!) I'm not trying to diminsh your views, and I am sure this is not new to you, but the fact that this problem is being influenced to a large degree by the TR community, highlights one of the obstacles to achieving an equitable solution.

Our ranks are made up of plenty of older shooters. If we recall, F-Class was started because Ol' Farky was having difficulty with his eyesight and was unable to compete as a TR shooter. Although the sport has evolved well beyond being just a place where the infirm can end their shooting careers, much of the objection to the new targets is coming from our elder shooters. Two of those that have complained the loudest to me are still using telephones and typewriters to stay connected with the world and cannot (and most certainly WOULD not) lurk here to air their grivances. I respect these outstanding mentors, gentlemen, and outstanding marksmen a great deal, and I will 'fight' for them.

Cheers,

Ian
 
I just had a heated discussion with an army type shooter. He states the whole world shot on equal sized target, up to the invent of FClass. The original target with it's 1 moa V bull, was designed for peep sights or a duplex low power scope. It was shooter against shooter. He also stated, in the last 10 years, it has turned into an equipment race in all the shooting sports, racing for better BC bullets, better rests, better optics, better cartridges, better barrels, better stocks and the like. He said, if you don't like what they got and use at the FB ranges now, start your own club and use your own targets. Since I can not afford this, I will shot at whatever they have and I will be happy with it.
 
Icfra f-class targets

I too will shoot at whatever target is presented however it would be nice to have the target centres for F-Class be scaled in minutes-of-angle to match our rifle sights. It's not a deal breaker but it just seems to make good sense to have both targets & sights scaled in minutes. I know, I know, a number of scopes are not scaled to an exact m.o.a. even though the manufacturers say so but that is another issue.

I would like to hear if there is a good argument against the F-Class centres being scaled in m.o.a.

While we're at it lets hear the argument against a change to a solid white V-Bull. Black reticles on a black aiming mark makes no sense to me.

None of the above should have any impact on TR shooters but I'm sure I will hear about it if I'm wrong. The TR shooters will have to put up with our whinning for a little longer until we have this all sorted out but all good things are worth fighting for. Reasoned debates are healthy things.

Regards

Aubrey.
 
I too agree that true moa type targets would be best since all sights since the very beginning of time have been base on moa adjustments. True 1/2 moa rings would be really nice, esp. for the guy with a true mil-dot scope.

The smaller "issue" only exists on the 300m target, if it is really an issue(I think not myself). All others are over sized and have always been so!! The 500yd s/b .501 moa, 600yd s/b .517 moa, 800 s/b .716 moa, 900 s/b .636 moa and 1000 s/b .573 moa, if they are just halving the existing DCRA LR targets by adding an inner ring to the existing V bull sizes. I do not know the sizes of the ICFRA targets nor have I looked it up, or the new centers sizes yet myself, nor have I seen them, but whatever they are, it will be better than what we have now IMO.

Should these all also be true 1/2 moa targets??? If they are not an issue at the longer yardages, why would they be on the short 300m one is a hair tougher? As long as your plot sheet agrees with the target's ring sizes and you have moa lines on the plot sheet, you can adjust, or do it the old way, center the reticle and fire, center the reticle and adjust your crosshairs to the shot indicator, re-center and fire. Both should get you in the center. Now it is up to you to either hold off as the winds changes and fire, or adjust your sights.

Coming from a HBR BR background and shooting on many a true 1/2 moa 10 ring, I know with a true 1/2 moa ring and a .16" dot like the 100 yd HBR target has, you need 1/8 clicks to connect with the dot or X. 1/4 moa and you dance from one side to the other of the X, using clicks, so you hold off with your 6x scope. Thank god our X or V is not as small at the HBR's 100-200-300 yd targets are and we can use high powered scopes! We can still get away with 1/4 moa adjustments IMO and if need be, you hold off!

We asked for a smaller V and we got it, be happy with it!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom