Ok this is one of those times I am just going to add my 2 cents worth. My son and I shoot one rifle for both classes. I like that the rifles qualify for both classifications since we do not have the financial means to have different rifles for each. I think the overlap is great because it gives us the chance to shoot more.
Sometimes it appears in the "complaints" about the some of the rules on the standard and hunter rifles that many of the solutions offered would do nothing but limit many of the newer shooters who only have one rifle or those of us who can only afford one to shooting only one match.
I know personally to travel to matches and spend the money on hotels, gas and food I want to shoot and have fun, the more shooting I will get to do the more the more likely I am to go. I guess I would just like to say that I would hope that everyone would remember that we want to keep this sport around and make it grow, be careful not to leave out the little guys.
I admit I too am jealous of the bling races, and the custom guns (and the master shooters I strive to be like)... I just dream of the bling I will be able to someday add to the custom gun I hope won't just be in my head. Until then I will just practice, have fun, and pray to win the lottery.

chardonnay wrote:Sometimes it appears in the "complaints" about the some of the rules on the standard and hunter rifles that many of the solutions offered would do nothing but limit many of the newer shooters who only have one rifle or those of us who can only afford one to shooting only one match.

Ok, fair enough, but how would you feel if your "one rifle" had a barrel that wasn't tapered, a thumbhole stock, or was a couple ounces overweight for hunter class? You would be stuck shooting standard rifle only and be restricted to half of the fun as you describe.

It seems like there is no support for widening the gap between hunter and standard. Tell me then why we need two classes if the rifles are fundamentally the same? Why not just consolidate down to one class where everything that's legal anywhere is legal everywhere?

btw Innocent, do you shoot prairie dogs off hand with a 22lr? Can't we at least agree that as originally conceived the spirit of the designation "hunting rifle" meant "squirrel rifle" for smallbore and "deer rifle" for high power?

Um, who cares? Let's go practice with whatever we got...

I'm with blaubear, enough hot air on this already.

Well what would we do with the national records of current guns we have, if we changed the rules. Leave it the same and if one rifle prevails in the end for both classes so be it. I still saw quite a few heavy rifles at Raton. I shoot a 1712 single stage 2lb trigger and I like it. I am thinking of some sort of a 1710 D HB in the same hunter stock and same trigger as my hunter gun only heavier for the Standard class. Everything the same but heavier seems like it may have some merit. After all I would then have alot of interchangeable parts if needed at a match.

kevin

Consider that the real problem is that existing rules encouraged development of Hunter class equipment that is competitive in Standard class and the question becomes "What rule changes might encourage improvements in Standard class equipment?" Loosely, I believe a Hunter rifle might actually be carried into a hunt, never mind the actual game, so weight and simplicity matter.

What rule changes might encourage innovation in Standard class equipment?

How about allowing adjustable stocks and weight increases, eliminating the stock jig. Other than that I am not sure.

Carl425,
yes I did shoot the closer whistling p-dogs with 22LR from a standing position, just to see if I could do it. The longer distances I was using 222,
but yes I do agree the intention of hunting rifle rules originally was basically a straight from the box rifle used for carrying in the field.

Mary

Hmm. Seems my hunting rilfe is shaped a lot like my Hunter gun. Monte Carlo cheek piece, tapered stainless barrel and oooh, a schnable tip like and Anschutz. Of course it doesn't have an Anschutz two stage trigger but it does have Timney at 2.5 lbs!

Guess what? It shoots like a Hunter Gun! Last fall it took a nice big bodied mule dear at apx 85 yards from offhand. It was just like a shoot off since everyone else shot first. I pulled in my left hand, planted my elbow and focused on the spot. Luckily I remembered in the last instant to nudge the cross hairs off the black spot under the tail. Didn't want to "pasturize" the meat.

There's a high power hunter gun in development at home. I'm also preparing a second hunting stock. Me thinks a 6.5mm Hunter Rifle ought to make one hell of a deer gun.

dwl

kevinp wrote:How about allowing adjustable stocks and weight increases, eliminating the stock jig. Other than that I am not sure.

I'd second increasing the weight and eliminating the stock jig since this would encourage experimentation up to the limits of what a shooter can hold without starting steroids. Adjustable stocks are "been there, done that" instead of new ground, and encouraging experimentation should help our sport grow.

BlauBear wrote:

kevinp wrote:How about allowing adjustable stocks and weight increases, eliminating the stock jig. Other than that I am not sure.

I'd second increasing the weight and eliminating the stock jig since this would encourage experimentation up to the limits of what a shooter can hold without starting steroids. Adjustable stocks are "been there, done that" instead of new ground, and encouraging experimentation should help our sport grow.

Have the weight like in Air Rifle 16 lbs max. and call it 'Open Class' and leave everything else alone

Sorry folks, but this really seems to be a "let's change the rules for the sake of changing the guns" without any real reason for doing it to me. The only goal seems to be to make sure that people who only shoot one gun and use it both classes are at enough of a disadvantage that they have no choice but to buy another gun to be competitive. That seems very much against the "it's the shooter, not the gun" spirit of silhouette shooting. I think we have enough conflict in the sport right now without causing more with rule changes.

Personally, I can't shoot a 10.2 gun as well as I shoot an 8 1/2 pound gun. A good two stage 2 lb trigger is as easy to shoot as a 8 oz trigger given the practice. All boils down to what you want to shoot. I don't think if you see the rules liberalized in Standard you would see much more than what we have seen to date. You can build a rifle that will shoot one perfect shot better than what we have now, perhaps, but shooting 40 perfect shots without stressing the shooter past his or her peak performance is another thing....Just my 2 cents worth.

Kitty

jneihouse wrote:Personally, I can't shoot a 10.2 gun as well as I shoot an 8 1/2 pound gun. ... You can build a rifle that will shoot one perfect shot better than what we have now, perhaps, but shooting 40 perfect shots without stressing the shooter past his or her peak performance is another thing....Just my 2 cents worth.

Kitty

Too true! This leaves the dreaded stock jig as a potential area for improvement. To me, this is change to encourage innovation in something that's pretty refined already, although some of us might shoot better if we hit the gym more often...

Open up the optics?

Good point Jason!!!!!