Service Rifle rigs

What about the RCMP issued C8? Trigger at 4.5 lbs standard issue trigger, drop testes and certified by NSWC and four other armies. Floating bbl, one piece upper. Service rifle as issued for CAFSAM.

The new CF rifles and carbines will all be free floated with the next upgrade.

Dutch and Danes all have free floated C7.

Gunnerlove said:
I guess I have a hard time accepting that the KAC M-110 and C7CT are service rifles.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
C77 said:
What about the RCMP issued C8? Trigger at 4.5 lbs standard issue trigger, drop testes and certified by NSWC and four other armies. Floating bbl, one piece upper. Service rifle as issued for CAFSAM.

The new CF rifles and carbines will all be free floated with the next upgrade.

Dutch and Danes all have free floated C7.
Click to expand...

10 years from now every army I can think of will still be running 4x or lower optics on their service rifles and feeding them 62gr ball ammo.

I am not saying ban "space guns" and you can only shoot what fits in the C7A2 shaped box. I am saying that getting people on the line and feeling like they have a chance is very important from a marketing and participation point of view.
The people currently shooting in Open are happy to continue what they are doing, but they are not the issue, the people not competing are the Issue.
 
Is the tyro class not already there to allow new shooters to have the change to win something? At NSCC, there is an award for tyros for each match, for the aggregates and for the stage 1 grand aggregate already.

The number of aggregates the existing CF, open and tyro classes have are already overwhelming the stats office. Adding more classes would be unrealistic without adding more days to the event to allow for them to compile the numbers and have the necessary re-shoots, which if anything would discourage more people from coming. They are complaining that it's too long as it is.

I don't see why people who are running equipment that fits in your "box" shouldn't be allowed to compete in the CF class. The equipment shouldn't need to be exact; it isn't when you compete against other countries' military teams, and no one is hollering about giving the C8 shooters their own class when they're probably at a bigger disadvantage to the C7 than the C7 is to any "spacegun". I know a fair number of shooters that would jump at that chance. Heck, they'd run a C7 clone with an Elcan on top if they were allowed to compete in that class. That would have a greater marketing effect than a separate civilian class ever would...
 
Last edited:
Looking at the stats there was exactly 1 civilian Tyro at NSCC 2013. People are already not coming. However you say that you know people interested in competing against soldiers on a less slanted playing field. That is my point.

There is no rifle at Bisley with an optic more powerful than 4X because no one issues them, all rifles are inspected for modifications at irregular intervals (including winning a match) and everyone is shooting 62gr ball ammo. Other than making us all shoot RG ammo I don`t know how they could level it more.
 
Put them in the same class as soldiers and they will be on the same playing field. They won't feel excluded in any way. They can tell all their friends and family that they were put in the same class as the soldiers because their gear was the same... unlike those open class gamers! What could be better marketing?
 
In that case why keep open class? It only has a dozen or so shooters and most of them are military. Answer, choice is good and we can't afford to turn people away.
The lack of competitors shows something needs to change, however it makes sense to avoid making changes to the class that is 80% of attendance.
 
You're not changing the class, you're just not turning people away from it, which is exactly what is being done now. You want people to conform to a set of rules that makes them equivalent to a certain group, but then keep them segregated from that group when the follow those rules. That by its very defenition is turning them away. They follow the rules, but they still aren't allowed in the clubhouse? Yeah, that IS turning them away.

We have more civies come to the provincial matches that are shot on the same range. For the most part, a completely different group than the nationals. I guess that would either be because its easier to get people out for two days on the weekend than it is to get them out for four days during the week, or its because we don't segregate them into different groups.
 
Last edited:
kombayotch said:
Oh, it already does happen. People are quick to point to the equipment when it does, but quicker to ignore when it doesn't. There have also been a few good CF shooters that tried running "spaceguns" and ended up doing worse than they do with their C7s, but nobody will ever make a big deal out of that...



I'd probably feel that way too if the issued equipment fit me. Maybe the "average" sized people should be made to adapt to what fits the extremes, just to "walk a mile in the other guy's shoes". The last time I handed a 5'8" tall guy my rifle with the grip that fits my hand, he couldn't reach the trigger... Litterally, the tip of his finger didn't reach it.
Click to expand...


Doesn't that just fall back on the "train like you fight, fight like you train" mentality?? :)
 
firemachine69 said:
Doesn't that just fall back on the "train like you fight, fight like you train" mentality?? :)
Click to expand...

You're not training how you would fight when the way you run the equipment on the range requires you to need to know the size of your target, know its distance, and have your shots marked with a big orange dot in order to make the adjustments necessary to hit it.
 
kombayotch said:
Is the tyro class not already there to allow new shooters to have the change to win something? At NSCC, there is an award for tyros for each match, for the aggregates and for the stage 1 grand aggregate already.

The number of aggregates the existing CF, open and tyro classes have are already overwhelming the stats office.

I don't see why people who are running equipment that fits in your "box" shouldn't be allowed to compete in the CF class. The equipment shouldn't need to be exact; it isn't when you compete against other countries' military teams, and no one is hollering about giving the C8 shooters their own class when they're probably at a bigger disadvantage to the C7 than the C7 is to any "spacegun". I know a fair number of shooters that would jump at that chance. Heck, they'd run a C7 clone with an Elcan on top if they were allowed to compete in that class. That would have a greater marketing effect than a separate civilian class ever would...
Click to expand...

Part of the problem is there is just plain too many awards at NSCC regardless of the number of classes. And this is coming from somebody who took home a bag full (literally) of them last year. I do sorta like the idea of having an OPEN class and a SERVICE class though. In the ORA we don't have an OPEN and CF class. Of course the CF guys mostly win anyway.

Gunnerlove said:
Looking at the stats there was exactly 1 civilian Tyro at NSCC 2013.
Click to expand...

And a darned handsome one at that. :)

As for civilians coming to NSCC, its pretty damned expensive in terms of time and travel expenses. All the civi's last year were from ON except for one staff member as I recall. I don't think changing classes is going to make the cost to compete at NSCC any less.

kombayotch said:
We have more civies come to the provincial matches that are shot on the same range. For the most part, a completely different group than the nationals. I guess that would either be because its easier to get people out for two days on the weekend than it is to get them out for four days during the week, or its because we don't segregate them into different groups.
Click to expand...

I would say more the former Komb. Especially those of us with families. I'm lucky that I have a tolerant family but 4 days at the start of September is a ##### for a lot of people. We also need to encourage those local Ottawa ORA shooters to come out for nationals as well.
 
Bolivar said:
I would say more the former Komb. Especially those of us with families. I'm lucky that I have a tolerant family but 4 days at the start of September is a ##### for a lot of people. We also need to encourage those local Ottawa ORA shooters to come out for nationals as well.
Click to expand...

I know... the second part was tongue-in-cheek. It goes back to my comment about the event being too long. Most people will not use a week of the precious 2-3 week of vacation they get each year to go to a shooting match (or their spouse won't let them). Creating new classes, or changing them around isn't going to change that. Matches that are held over weekends will always have a better turnout than ones that are held during the week.

Its not just the Ottawa shooters, none of the large QC group that shoot the matches turn out for NSCC either...
 
Bolivar said:
I do sorta like the idea of having an OPEN class and a SERVICE class though. In the ORA we don't have an OPEN and CF class. Of course the CF guys mostly win anyway.
Click to expand...

I'm not opposed to having a SERVICE class IF everyone who has equipment that fits that definition shoots in that class regardless of whether they are CF shooting issued stuff or civie shooting their own gear. It makes little sense to me to have two classes that run equivalent equipment.
 
kombayotch said:
I'm not opposed to having a SERVICE class IF everyone who has equipment that fits that definition shoots in that class regardless of whether they are CF shooting issued stuff or civie shooting their own gear. It makes little sense to me to have two classes that run equivalent equipment.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. But development of weapon, optics and ammunition rules that are on par with the CF, especially with regard to ammo, does become problematic. Economically many want to shoot hand loaded ammo which may be better or may be worse than IVI. If we could purchase IVI for the competition that would be great but I don't see that happening. Some civil rifles may be chambed in 223 rather than 5.56 so encouraging them to shoot 5.56 could lead to problems and liability. Not sure if there is a commercial equivalent to IVI in terms of quality and trying to determine if handloads are equivalent would be about impossible.

Honestly, as I try to wrap my head around this it seems to be a much more difficult thing to come up with vs the current CF - OPEN system that NSCC runs now and I am not 100% convinced it will do anything to increase civilian participation. I certainly don't see anyway that it will benefit CF members who are competing. I'm not sure it's worth the effort.
 
You're splitting hairs...

Plug a few numbers into JBM:
Std. Conditions
500m with 100m zero, 10MPH Wind
Bullet Velocity Drop Wind
69 SMK 2800 76.9 38.0
M855 (C7) 3030 68.2 39.3
M855 (C8) 2850 79.8 43.1

C77 is good ammo. It's accurate and the bullet has a much higher BC than regular 62 gr. FMJ due to it's longer profile. The velocity is also higher than what you can load to safely due to the crimped primer. In terms of ballistics, the C8 loses more to the C7 than the C7 does to a 69 SMK running over a ~25gr. Varget load.
 
I used a SwissArms BlueStar at NSCC a few years ago, guess that will not be happeing again. I do however have a new SG542 that I have high hopes for as a service rifle.
 
DCRA stats has no problem dealing with 300 competitors in three classes (Regular, Reserve, and International) at CAFSAC.

C77 is decent ammo, however if it was as good as match ammo people would not pull it down and reload it with match bullets.

If matches and awards need to be juggled/changed to make life easier, so be it, things change, or they die.
 
Change has worked out well for the ORA. More people attending, no need for classes, and matches take half the time to run.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom