PRS is anything but practical, change my mind

owlowl

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
34   0   1
It appears to me, that PRS went from an awesome idea into a pure ego driven sport.

Over very short time stock production sniper setups were totally displaced with a single purpose built race rigs and gear. Rules went the same way creating in a second F-class so to speak, or should I rather say "IPSC open with a light artillery pieces".

  • 30 inch long barrels
  • 23+ lbs weight
  • Gazillion magnification scopes
  • Pillows and rests bigger than backpacks
  • Rests, supports and gadgets machined and attached to a rifle in order to get a tiny bit of an advantage in some odd position.


The ranges are going up and up while calibers are getting smaller and smaller. 6.5 was too big, now everyone runs 6mm. But 100gr over 800+ meters is just too little energy for anything "practical".

No I get it, its a sport, people game for fun. I'm fine with that. It's not the point. But it's ironic at least for me to see, how PRS exploded on a premise of real shooting application only to become a joke of "practicality" - anything but practical.

I'm actually expecting the same split as IDPA people did from IPSC just to have something more reasonable than a pure sport. What do you think?

PS
There is nothing wrong with PRS. F-Class or IPSC open. I don't imply that.
 
Okay, I'll bite.

The "Practical" aspect of it I think is quite valid as it challenges the shooters in ways that replicate difficult unforeseeable shooting situations. The stages are designed to overwhelm shooters mentally and they must perform well under stress. That is practical.

I'm not sure I understand what you think might be impractical about a 100 grain 6 mm at 800 meters as they are supersonic well past that these days, thanks to bullet improvements in recent years. I suppose it depends on what you might be shooting at. Besides, shooting skill is not caliber dependent. If what you wanted to hit at long range required more foot pounds, the ballistics would not significantly change.

Magnification is actually quite low for most guys. They typically only run around 15 power. Higher magnification limits the field of view making it hard to find the right target to shoot at.

Pillows and rests are mixed. Earlier on I saw guys dressed up like the Michelin tire man, but that's pretty rare any more. These days the best shooters use a simple small bag with heavy sand. It seems that simple is better in the long run.

I suppose we could disagree about the term practical, but I can tell you this... When you watch a guy like Dave Preston print a score like 208 out of a possible 220, given the challenges of time, stage construction ballistics etc, it's impossible not to be impressed. I didn't even get 208 shots off, and he made 208 hits last year at Meaford. (We were in the same squad.)

You take a guy like Dave Preston and put him in any situation that you define as practical and he will make the hit with mind numbing regularity and make it look easy.

I will not argue with you about the accessories though, it does get kinda silly. I would prefer that the rules called for a more limited set of options like just a bipod and sand bag, but hey it is what it is.

As for the distances... They throw a few long range targets out there so guys can brag about the 1400 + yard target in "their sport". Ask them how many guys actually hit it during a match and feel free to laugh. I remember a couple years ago the spotter thought the hit indicator on the 880 yard moose was broken because it never lit up after 45 guys shot at it. I came along with a 223 and made the hit. The spotter thanked me for confirming the light worked.

I focus on being efficient out to 800 yards. I spend my time and energy on being good inside 800. Past 800 I will hold high and shoot quickly to get the shot away and get back to more makeable distances. I'm not throwing the shot away, but I will not spend much time or mental energy on low percentage shots. There's rarely very many targets out past 900 yards anyway, just a few for bait.

It certainly is a ton of fun and you are sure to enjoy it if you get out to a match some time.

If you find some of the equipment over the top, don't use it. You are free to use whatever you like. I've seen guys out there with WW2 fatigues and rifle rolling old school and doing well.

Don't forget about the prizes. They are thankfully typically very good in PRS. Much better than F Class.

I don't foresee any kind of split other than the 22 LR matches as a convenient training base for center fire.
 
Last edited:
I’m shooting my first rimfire “prs” match this weekend. I’m in production class $500 rifle/$700 optic. The course of fire leaves me hoping I score 20% of the available points. If I spent $10K on stuff I could shoot better, but it’s my choice to decide to compete in that class. Throwing shade on the competitors that do spend big is like auditing your neighbour’s use of his pickup truck to see if he “deserves” to own one. Says more about you than anything. Maybe I’m being a bit harsh, but you asked.
 
Well, "practical" in my terms would be something that has a practical application in a life beyond sport.

For instance, IDPA rules for concealed weapon are silly if you look at all the people using fishing vests for garments, but the rules and premise of IDPA is to be an exercise in practical application of a firearm in self defense. You can't expect people to have machine guns and armor vest with 8 30round rifle mags. Or and IPSC open race gun as everyday carry. So you are training for the situation which has piratical application with everyday carry.

Now back to "rifle practicality". If I look beyond PRS as a sport itself. Would you hunt with these howitzers? No. Would you have same ammunition for either hunting or combat? No. Does a regular bolt action hunting rifle handles anything close to a 25lbs PRS rig? No. Would you go to a hunt or to a battle or to a self defense with 3 pillows? No. Can you even WALK with this chunks of iron through a bush for 3 miles? No. Even if you did, for the weight it would be 50 bmg or 338 lapua which are nothing like 6mmBR.

So if PRS is all about gear which is not usable in real life for anything "practical" why would you call learning and mastering these skills a "practical" sport. Its like olympic fencing. I'm sure it is amazing hard. Yes its good as a sport for your reaction times and cardio, but in a matter of practical application as a weapon its a joke even if you happen to have your foil with you on a street.

Practical for me would be something like "a rifle you can carry, with ammo you would use with positions which are common but hard for a shooter". How standard PRS barricades are practical? I never saw a forest or a town or a backyard full of rectangular slits strong enough to balance 12 kg iron axle. I won't even mention the practicality of these "skills" in combat as that would be the last thing you ever do - sticking your rig from the window instead of sitting in a dark corner as far away from the slit as possible.

Again, I have nothing against all that as a FUN and its own SPORT. But I'm saying it amazingly not practical despite the name. At least it became so. Can you take a bunch of I dunno Canadian Rangers with orange Tikkas to compete in PRS? It would be a joke. Could you imagine same people in the woods with PRS rigs - even more laughable. So what is practical in PRS?

PS
Again. I'm not saying PRS is bad and I don't imply that people do not work hard and compete at the best of their ability. I'm all for it.
 
The name aside, wasn't it supposed to be "real life" positions and "active" as opposed to old stale F-class and bench rest and all that?
 
Any body that knows me knows I love purist matches. Rifle 1 bipod, no leg extensions. 1 rear bag that fits in the ammo can. Go out and shoot. But the fact is most don't like it. They like the "if I buy the latest greatest I'll make it to the top" most of the people on top shoot a lot. I would like to shoot more but often funding and other family duties keep me from that.
 
I can think of lots of reasons for shooting off the variety of props and barricades that we do.
Its about creativity and improvisation. If you can shoot off a kids swing set, a tree or rock isn't going to be very tricky.
A "standard" PRS barricade? How is shooting off that any different then shooting off a window sill, top of a fence, mailbox, chair, table, railing, BBQ, low wall etc etc.
Is a car hood practical enough? What about a 55 gallon drum? Roof tops? What about the rocks and trees in a field match; the majority of ranges don't exactly have a diverse range of terrain on the firing line...
It is far more "practical" then benchrest or F-class, unless OP can name a real world situation where someone is going to indicate your misses with an orange plastic disk...
 
I'll bite. I shoot a lot of PRS-type matches, both here and down in the States, and quite enjoy them. Is the current state of PRS/NRL "practical"? Not really but to be successful you do need to be very proficient with a rifle and be able to quickly build a stable shooting position on random props/obstacles and those skills translate to any kind of field rifle use.

To understand why matches are what they are now, you need to look at how matches evolved into their current form. The original matches were "field matches" shot in, you guessed it "field conditions" and guys generally had a "sniper type" rifle. The problem was that you can't hold a true field match in all that many locations so the current iteration of PRS/NRL matches grew from people running matches on more traditional ranges but trying to simulate the obstacles you'd shoot off with props. Being that you could more easily run matches like that in many more areas, the sport grew and guys and gear got better. As hit percentages went up, the options were to limit gear, increase distances, decrease times and/or make more awkward props. Pretty much all of that has happened except the gear limitations. 90s stages with multiple positions shooting at multiple targets at different ranges are routine. The level of skill and the improved gear makes that possible. Most guys are opposed to the idea of creating arbitrary rules to limit gear because no one can decide on what the limit should be. Considering that you don't have to move real far from stage to stage (although some of the matches out here in the West you still end up moving a mile or 2 over the course of the day), weight isn't exactly a huge concern and most guys can easily carry a 20+lbs rifle and gear all day (never mind that a "sniper rifle" isn't far off that weight, an M40A6 weighs about 18lbs, add a clip-on NV scope and an IR illuminator/laser and you're over 20lbs easy).

Although not as common as PRS/NRL, there are plenty of matches out there that weigh other requirements than just the "pure" shooting aspect of PRS/NRL. There are team and solo matches that require you to hump your gear all day and identify, range and engage targets on the clock in field conditions. The Rifleman's Team Challenge matches, Competition Dynamics matches, Bushnell Sniper matches, Mammoth Sniper Challenge, Sniper Adventure Challenge are all examples of these "more realistic" matches. These matches all have their own intricacies but they generally involve moving over greater distances, doing target id and ranging on the clock. Some of these matches (Competition Dynamics) use total time as part of the score and some have time "hacks" that you have to make for the rucks. Obviously these kind of matches require you to prioritize your gear differently. I've shot numerous RTC matches and since the movements aren't timed, I still carry a heavy PRS-typical rifle. Before Covid kicked off, I was scheduled to shoot the Burris Optics Team Challenge, a match run by Competition Dynamics where each day you shoot a match on a course that is about 1.5 miles long. There are 6+ firing position, each with multiple targets for the team to find, range and engage. The whole thing is timed. Obviously, the rifle I was planning on bringing was going to be a compromise in that it would be lighter but not so light as to handicap me when shooting, as the bolt gunner only gets 1 round per target. A 2-day match like Mammoth, where you carry all your gear (including food, sleep system, etc) for the 2 days would require you to similarly cut the weight you carry and weigh what compromises work best for you. Tangentially, there are also matches that have either (or both) weight and minimal "power factor" requirements, such as the NF ELR match Scott Satterlee runs in Wyoming (sub 16lbs rifle all in hunter class or open class) and his Hornady Precision Hunter match (sub 16 or sub 12lbs rifle classes all with a minimum power factor that works out to a 140gr 6.5 bullet going 2750fps). Finally, if you're mil or Leo, there are sniper matches that aren't open to civis that include elements of field craft as well (USASOC, etc).

What I can tell you though, as someone who is relatively plugged into the world of competitive precision rifle matches, the guys who win matches do so across the spectrum of match types, be it PRS/NRL, RTC, Competition Dynamics, Military matches (USASOC) etc which in my mind, is proof that the skills all cross over. The shooter just has to adapt himself to the particular set of rules that govern the particular "game" he is playing that day.

As an aside, competitive precision rifle shooting has helped improve the gear that military and police snipers field. Things that "old school" shooters pooh-pooh like tripods, game changer bags, pump pillows, etc are all used by "professional" shooters these days. Tripods are part of the curriculum for military snipers, Leo snipers often deploy with Gamechangers and pump pillows and the list goes on.
 
Last edited:
There’s also nothing saying that you can’t run what you believe to be the most practical. Sure it could hurt competitiveness but unless your one of the top couple guys it really doesn’t matter. Even then one of the pros in the US took 2nd in a match shooting a lightweight 284 Shehane because he had it all set up for something else and felt like trying it. Fun and skill building should be the goal in any activity.
 
No sarcasm. I've changed my mind.

The main argument that did it was "there are no limits and rules because no one can agree on what the limits ought to be". I gave it a hard thought actually and the way I feel it, its probably better to have no limits and honest evolution and natural selection of gear and techniques rather than limits which are not obvious.

Lets say I personally would be more interested in ultra light class I guess with off hand shooting and unsupported. But even then I don't see how you would make up the rules and limits, would any extra less oz be a point advantage or some cutoff weight limit - all these options in terms of competitive sport will be exploited anyway. Forcing a specific make/model or a cartridge is even more evil. So I don't know.

And yes, I was mostly fooling around with the topic, but surprisingly there is a lot of thinking and desire for another point of view on my part.
 
I'm not sure if that's sarcasm, haha. I'll say that if you're at all intrigued by PRS-type matches (assuming you haven't shot one) you should try and get out to whichever type there is in your area. It's a ton of fun if nothing else :)

Great explanation of the sport Dave; never realized how diverse the matches could be.

Tried my first PRS Match this summer and had an absolute blast. Great, friendly people of all age groups and abilities.

The main learning I came away with from my first experience in PRS is 'the toughest competition is yourself.'

Cheers and thank you.
 
People are carrying all that gear because it's useful more often than it's dead weight. It may be a sign that there are too many stages that want that stuff and too few where it only slows you down.

But then there are pressures on stage designers for popular stages so that their matches will fill up; people want to shoot stages that meet their expectations and are fun, and might not come back if unusual challenges torque them off. Too easy for "standard" stages to evolve and exceptions to become rare.
 
If your definition of practical is field / hunting / war, then yes, PRS has gone on a bit of a tangent because it is a game and people want to win. However, as pointed out in previous posts, the people with the skills and knowledge to win will likely do exceptionally well in pretty much any situation with a military issued AI, Sako, Cadex, etc. Keep in mind too that for many of these fancy PRS guns, all you need to do is swap the stock for something more conservative and voila, you have a “practical” rifle. Not everyone runs 30” heavy profile barrels. My PRS gun is a .308 T3 CTR with a 20” barrel. Sure it’s a bit of a handicap but I’ve done fairly well with it and it doubles as my hunting rifle when I swap the stock and optics. My 2 cents.
 
I'll bite. I shoot a lot of PRS-type matches, both here and down in the States, and quite enjoy them. Is the current state of PRS/NRL "practical"? Not really but to be successful you do need to be very proficient with a rifle and be able to quickly build a stable shooting position on random props/obstacles and those skills translate to any kind of field rifle use.

To understand why matches are what they are now, you need to look at how matches evolved into their current form. The original matches were "field matches" shot in, you guessed it "field conditions" and guys generally had a "sniper type" rifle. The problem was that you can't hold a true field match in all that many locations so the current iteration of PRS/NRL matches grew from people running matches on more traditional ranges but trying to simulate the obstacles you'd shoot off with props. Being that you could more easily run matches like that in many more areas, the sport grew and guys and gear got better. As hit percentages went up, the options were to limit gear, increase distances, decrease times and/or make more awkward props. Pretty much all of that has happened except the gear limitations. 90s stages with multiple positions shooting at multiple targets at different ranges are routine. The level of skill and the improved gear makes that possible. Most guys are opposed to the idea of creating arbitrary rules to limit gear because no one can decide on what the limit should be. Considering that you don't have to move real far from stage to stage (although some of the matches out here in the West you still end up moving a mile or 2 over the course of the day), weight isn't exactly a huge concern and most guys can easily carry a 20+lbs rifle and gear all day (never mind that a "sniper rifle" isn't far off that weight, an M40A6 weighs about 18lbs, add a clip-on NV scope and an IR illuminator/laser and you're over 20lbs easy).

Although not as common as PRS/NRL, there are plenty of matches out there that weigh other requirements than just the "pure" shooting aspect of PRS/NRL. There are team and solo matches that require you to hump your gear all day and identify, range and engage targets on the clock in field conditions. The Rifleman's Team Challenge matches, Competition Dynamics matches, Bushnell Sniper matches, Mammoth Sniper Challenge, Sniper Adventure Challenge are all examples of these "more realistic" matches. These matches all have their own intricacies but they generally involve moving over greater distances, doing target id and ranging on the clock. Some of these matches (Competition Dynamics) use total time as part of the score and some have time "hacks" that you have to make for the rucks. Obviously these kind of matches require you to prioritize your gear differently. I've shot numerous RTC matches and since the movements aren't timed, I still carry a heavy PRS-typical rifle. Before Covid kicked off, I was scheduled to shoot the Burris Optics Team Challenge, a match run by Competition Dynamics where each day you shoot a match on a course that is about 1.5 miles long. There are 6+ firing position, each with multiple targets for the team to find, range and engage. The whole thing is timed. Obviously, the rifle I was planning on bringing was going to be a compromise in that it would be lighter but not so light as to handicap me when shooting, as the bolt gunner only gets 1 round per target. A 2-day match like Mammoth, where you carry all your gear (including food, sleep system, etc) for the 2 days would require you to similarly cut the weight you carry and weigh what compromises work best for you. Tangentially, there are also matches that have either (or both) weight and minimal "power factor" requirements, such as the NF ELR match Scott Satterlee runs in Wyoming (sub 16lbs rifle all in hunter class or open class) and his Hornady Precision Hunter match (sub 16 or sub 12lbs rifle classes all with a minimum power factor that works out to a 140gr 6.5 bullet going 2750fps). Finally, if you're mil or Leo, there are sniper matches that aren't open to civis that include elements of field craft as well (USASOC, etc).

What I can tell you though, as someone who is relatively plugged into the world of competitive precision rifle matches, the guys who win matches do so across the spectrum of match types, be it PRS/NRL, RTC, Competition Dynamics, Military matches (USASOC) etc which in my mind, is proof that the skills all cross over. The shooter just has to adapt himself to the particular set of rules that govern the particular "game" he is playing that day.

As an aside, competitive precision rifle shooting has helped improve the gear that military and police snipers field. Things that "old school" shooters pooh-pooh like tripods, game changer bags, pump pillows, etc are all used by "professional" shooters these days. Tripods are part of the curriculum for military snipers, Leo snipers often deploy with Gamechangers and pump pillows and the list goes on.

This is an excellent point when it comes to tripods. You can get away with no tripod in a PRS shoot but it is pretty much a necessity in field shoots. If you can shoot off a PRS barricade you’ll have no issue shooting off a tripod.
 
Back
Top Bottom