Another silly question . . . .

Gary - Please note that there are thousands registered here and that there is a "cookie" to be gleaned from most every thread. Certainly, within those thousands there are members that prefer to "banter" as with any forum. If you noticed prior to the "moderation" effort, the fellows that engaged in the "put downs" initially had an opinion.

Tim and Hambone - Please try to resist those personal exchanges....
 
Hambone said:
The thing that makes all the difference between the 2.....................????????


The guy pulling the trigger!
Click to expand...

I agree on one hand and disagree on the other. All else being equal, skill could be the deciding factor. However, it's almost impossible for all else to be equal. I'm an equipment/ammo advocate and believe a competitors success is closely related. The top competitors make it their business to show up with the best they can get their hands on. That's what makes them top competitors.
 
Wilbur said:
I agree on one hand and disagree on the other. All else being equal, skill could be the deciding factor. However, it's almost impossible for all else to be equal. I'm an equipment/ammo advocate and believe a competitors success is closely related. The top competitors make it their business to show up with the best they can get their hands on. That's what makes them top competitors.
Click to expand...

IMO and experience the most skilled get the most out of their equipment/ammo. Thats why top competitors are top competitors. Hence the potential folly in the seeking of that world beating batch in the vain hope that it will somehow shift you up the score sheet. The dividing line between damn fine and world class ammo especially in 50yd .22r/f br is so negligible as to be almost undecernible by 99.99% of shooters. Those that claim otherwise are deluding themselves or just lying!
 
Hambone said:
IMO and experience the most skilled get the most out of their equipment/ammo. Thats why top competitors are top competitors. Hence the potential folly in the seeking of that world beating batch in the vain hope that it will somehow shift you up the score sheet. The dividing line between damn fine and world class ammo especially in 50yd .22r/f br is so negligible as to be almost undecernible by 99.99% of shooters. Those that claim otherwise are deluding themselves or just lying!
Click to expand...

Wilbur, you want to answer this or should I?
 
Wilbur, it isn't just Tim. I suspect it isn't just Tim and me, either. The problem I have with Hambone is if he has any personal experience -- of the kind that might have value -- he doesn't share it. His posts are repetitions of things he's heard or read. His selection process escapes me. That means the usual bell-shaped curve doesn't apply; he manages to be wrong more often than right. Or maybe that's just a symptom of looking for contention.

Well, we're all adults, whats the harm? There are two. The first is the pattern itself is offensive. The ignore list can solve that one. The second is how is a new shooter to have any sense of what is valuable information, an opinion, or simply a erroneous repetition of yet another old wives tale? The usual resolution, discussion, isn't possible. At the first evidence of disagreement, at best you get quoted another piece of passed on information. Usually, personal attacks are the reply.

So. I will try hard to not fall for the trap of turning the discussion into a matter of wit. Rather, I'll simply hound his posts, pointing out to newer shooters when, and for what reasons, I & others disagree. I'll allow I'll probably fail from time to time, and you can chide me for that. The problem with the approach is Hambone quickly deflects a discussion by turning to personal attacks.

For all we know, he is a world class shooter, who simply refuses to share any of his knowledge. Reminds me of a joke we had in school "I'm omniscience, but lie a lot." How is one to know? Problem is, neither of the two possibilities are useful.

Charles
 
Oh boy... the ol' moaning minnie's are sure out tonight. LOL
 
Well put Charles. Unfortunately the very nature of the internet lends itself to the anonomous expert with the predictable retort and for what it's worth judging from the PM's I've recieved, it's far from 2-3 guys. Remember this rather foolish little episode developed after a reference to rubbing elbows with some of "the greats" that I enquired about. Notice also the lack of credible response. It bothers me not in the least however isn't is sad how many newbies get turned upside down because in their initial quest for info they assume so much of what they read on forums to be supplied mostly by the knowledgeable.
 
I think it's all the nonsense from argumentative newbies, armchair shooters, and perennially unsuccessful competitors who prefer to talk rather than listen that are the reason why many of the recognized top shooters shy away from posting on the forums. Unfortunately, this means those who are here to actually learn something get fed lots of bad info like "Good shooting ability is what makes damned fine competitive ammo into world class ammo. Always has, always will!" This would leave a newbie to think that there is no difference in ammo performance from lot to lot and that any difference that a newbie sees is actually their inability to shoot well. Those of us that actually have had some success in this game know better. The frustration for us is that these argumentative neophytes (or trolls) can lead the sincere knowledge seeking newbies off track and because so many of us use nicknames, incomplete names, and internet alias etc. the newbies don't know whether they are getting advice from someone who has had success in national level competition (Tim Simbari) or someone who has no real experience or had any success (Hambone). There is a place here and at other forums for everyone if they are serious posters with a valid opinion (even those that may be presented with a bit of an edge to it) or question. It helps when posters know their place and not try to pass themselves off as an expert when they are not.

"When EF Hutton talks -- people listen."
 
Last edited:
Hambone said:
IMO and experience the most skilled get the most out of their equipment/ammo.
Click to expand...

Trivially true

Thats why top competitors are top competitors.
Click to expand...

Almost a tautology. Not useful.

Hence the potential folly in the seeking of that world beating batch in the vain hope that it will somehow shift you up the score sheet.
Click to expand...

Actually, it will shift you up. Just not to the top, if you're not that good a shooter.

The dividing line between damn fine and world class ammo especially in 50yd .22r/f br is so negligible as to be almost undecernible by 99.99% of shooters.
Click to expand...

Depends on what you build into "damn fine." If "damn fine" isn't defined as "only discernable by world class shooters," then I think it false. In any case, another general opinion, not based on any previous statement.

Here's why I think it false. I'm quite new to RF Benchrest. At local club matches, with Eley Black Box (generally capable ammunition), if I shoot the lots that test better in my rifle, I win or come in second. If I shoot the less good lots, I don't. Now this is club level. Nobody there is even of "regional class." I don't think anyone but me even had experience in Benchrest before shooting in this league. But the same principles apply as would apply at the national, or world level. Those that know how to shoot do better. And those that have better equipment, and have tested for better ammunition, place higher. Which is more important? A bad question to ask. Both are important.

Those that claim otherwise are deluding themselves or just lying!
Click to expand...

Just Hambone's opinion, unsupported by anything he said above.

And as a 1,000 yard shooter who can claim better than middle of the pack performance at the national level, I say it's wrong. If the point is only that the best equipment won't make a world beater out of a middle of the pack shooter, it is trivially true. And of no value beyond the "measure twice, cut once" kind of observation. I would think we all knew this before.

If the point is supposed to be that a world-class shooter doesn't need world-class equipment, I think it's false. There will be other world-class shooters at such a match who will have world-class equipment. They will do the winning. What's the percentage? I don't know. I'd say equipment is at least 50%.
 
>>>"If the point is only that the best equipment won't make a world beater out of a middle of the pack shooter, it is trivially true. And of no value beyond the "measure twice, cut once" kind of observation. I would think we all knew this before."<<<

Regarding the notion that world class equipment won't make a world beater out of a middle of the pack shooter, the thing is you certainly won't become one without it. Now, say you are a middle of the pack shooter, how do you know what is keeping you at that level? Is it your lack of skill or is it your equipment? The only way to tell is to get your hands on some world class equipment. I'll tell you my story. I was a perennial mid-pack shooter, I would win an occasional local level match but in any of the national rankings I was strictly middle of the pack with no clue how to get better. I practiced. I had the "hot" barrel and the action most often seen at the top of the equipment lists. I tested ammo. I tried most of the gizmos that came down the pike and no big improvement - still middle of the pack. Then one day I had the opportunity to shoot a world class rifle. It was like a whole new world opened up. The improvement was obvious and unmistakable. I placed an order for a new rifle and when I received it, immediately, my scores went up - a lot. And the thing is - with top equipment you can actually learn this game rather than just chase your tail in a state of confusion. Now without my equipment holding me back, I can better evaluate ammo and I can actually and confidently learn to dope the wind. If I was to go back to that lesser equipment, I probably would shoot it a little better now than I did before, but there would be a significant drop-off in performance from what I'm shooting now. My better performing rifle allowed me to really learn. The top shooters make sure they have the best equipment and they will oft times re-barrel their rifles several times by several different smiths in a season to find or keep that edge. They will also spend lots of time and $ testing ammo to find those killer lots and then they will buy as much of it as they can afford. That's just the way it is. Not every one will be willing or financially capable of going to these lengths to reach the top, but you won't get there and stay there without that kind of effort. That is the hard reality to this game.
 
Vibe said:
And now the topic comes back to what the OP originally asked - what is the difference from one lot to the next that makes one a "good" lot in many more rifles, one lot a good lot in a few rifles, and another lot not so good in any. Given that it's the same shooter - even a great shooter - doing the testing.
Click to expand...

It would appear if anybody knows, they are not willing to say, from what I have read so far.
 
Let the killing fields begin...........

Ok, I'm going out on a limb here. I'm not new to shooting, infact I'm not even going into what I have done in High Power in the early 90s, cause that doesn't matter. RF is very different and I really do know that. I have shoot many places, scored, and not scored. I am a nobody, who cares? I don't, but even so this isn't your personnel little posting place for put downs, hits, and the "I'm better than you are".

I see a lot of responses to my posts, even some very good words of wisdom, but if you all (not really all) read your posts, that you think your making a newbie, (pretend I don't know anything about shooting) learn anything than your wrong. Probably because you are all on your own ego trips and sides with each other.

Talk about a turn off. I am going to speak my mind because I'm sure there are others that don't have the balls to do it. I have a flame suit, so too bad. It is time you old timers took the time to realize this isn't your private little site. Give us little people a chance and respect. Yea I'm venting, who wouldn't? Besides all the comfortable (and may I say very educated and smart) ARSE HOLES who just don't get it just keep going on and on about what someone else said or has done and offer nothing but put downs.


It is not your private little site. If you want to help and educate us newbies, than do that!


PLEASE





or you will just end up with a site that is your little bickering spot that will soon go away.


I want to learn, I want to become better, but good god guys, this and the other site is just getting to be a drag.



OK, Flame suit on..............




Maybe you should listen instead of talking about yourselfs sometime.


Please help us little people out. your 30-40 yrs of experience isn't being shared. Would you share some of it?




Thanks, GRP


And if you want to vent and B****, please PM me, I'll be more than happy to hear from you all.................
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Afponicky - Actually, this is one of the most informative threads in recent time if you look past the personal stuff. I'll try to explain.....

Pete's original question was indeed hijacked as nobody knows the answer. Hambone supplied a pretty good answer as to why nobody knows. He then made a statement that a few folks disagreed with (myself included). Not that I thought the statement was totally incorrect but rather the way it was packaged. The thread then became (at least to me) a discussion of how top shooters become and remain (key word) top shooters. It seems some think that skill is the key while others think that equipment and ammo override skill. It is extremely important on so many levels that a beginning benchrest shooter has a grasp on this if said beginner has aspirations of winning.

Surely, both skill and a good rifle are required to win a benchrest match. A "good rifle" could be defined as a rifle that is consistent/predictable from one condition to the next. Said differently, will shoot to the same point of impact in the same wind regardless of what that wind might be. Logically, skill can only be developed with such a rifle.

Too many have moved from the outhouse to the penthouse by simply changing rifles for the skill factor to outweigh equipment. To remain at the top is where the skill comes in play. I'm gonna replace the word skill with determination. The aforementioned "good rifle", along with that special case of ammo, will in time become mediocre. The barrel will wear or the ammo will be depleted leaving the competitor short of where he wants to be. The top competitors (consistently top) know this day is coming and are constantly beating the bushes for a replacement - constantly. Truth is, those top guys are only competing among themselves. Everybody else was beat before they left home with their so-so rifles and/or so-so ammo.

So, what I'm trying to tell the beginner is that if you can't find a way to win or come close to winning you need a different rifle, barrel, ammo, etc... If you test several lots of ammo without success you need a different barrel. If you have tried different barrels and no joy, you need a different rifle. The easiest way, and cheapest, is to find a winning rifle and pay the guy whatever he wants for it. Once you have that rifle, you can take that very short course (about an hour) in skill and you're all set.

One more thing....never believe that you can build a new rifle of the same components/parts as a known winning rifle and end up with a winning rifle.
 
Last edited:
Wilbur and I are on the same page. A couple more points for newbies and all those who are struggling to succeed, say you are a shooter who has had the fortune to obtain a great rifle from a top smith, yet you still struggle. How do you know what the problem is? Well, the best thing to do is have a known good/successful rimfire shooter shoot it. Do they struggle with your rifle too? If not, then it's you (and that is hard for lots of people to admit). Now you know what it is you need to do. You need to practice more and learn proper set-up and bench technique and/or to dope the wind. Another tip, when you get that new rifle from a top smith, listen to him as to how to take care of it. If you ruin the barrel by improper cleaning techniques, you have no one to blame but yourself. I can tell you that sometimes a great shooting rifle will leave a shop only to be sent back because "it won't shoot". Often, upon examination it is found that that the shooter has ruined the barrel.

With my previous post I didn't want to give the impression that all you will need is a better rifle to consistently win. Some shooters think they are great shooters (they were born that way), or, they have had success in other shooting games, so it must be the equipment, only they never seem to find it. These folks are not likely to give their rifle to a top shooter to test (cause they know how to shoot). At some point you have to look in the mirror for the problem. There is a lot to this game and most of it will have to be learned the hard way. Regardless of your prior shooting experience, it can take a while to learn to shoot this game well. Having an experienced mentor will help lots but you won't find one of those if you come to a match with an attitude. Most successful shooters are willing to teach those who are willing to listen, but if you think you already know it all - they won't waste their time with you.
 
Last edited:
Pete Wass said:
Has it been learned WHY some lots of ammo shoots well in a large number of barrels, why some lots of ammo shoots well in a few barrels and some lots of ammo don't shoot well in anything? Perhaps the answer is obvious but I have never heard it or read it anywhere, if indeed the answer is known. There should be a way to quantify WHY shouldn't there?
Click to expand...


Pete, the answer is: nobody knows. I'm not sure the ammo manufacturers know (if they did there would be more great ammo out there and they want to put out lots of great ammo.) As a rimfire shooter, it is nothing we have any control over. We can only try to find the best lots of ammo we can find and barrels that are not ammo sensitive. Trial and error is the only method for finding both.
 
Bill B and I are close but I'm taking a firmer stand than He. I believe a hummer rifle can teach anyone with fingers how to shoot.
 
We are close, I believe a hummer rifle can teach almost anyone with fingers to shoot. Some folks just never seem to get it.
 
Wilbur said:
Bill B and I are close but I'm taking a firmer stand than He. I believe a hummer rifle can teach anyone with fingers how to shoot.
Click to expand...

This one needs a little expansion. The word "hummer" is used two ways. I think the term was coined by Tony Boyer, to mean a rifle (actually, a barrel) that was more than honest. Way back down the thread, Wilbur mentioned a barrel that performs the same in the wind, whatever that wind happened to be -- that is, you could trust it.

A Tony Boyer "hummer" does better than that. For some reason that no one knows -- and a lot of the best manufacturers and gunsmiths have looked -- the barrel helps you out, letting you make a small mistake and get away with it.

Other people use "hummer" to just mean a good barrel, a synonym for "honest."

So yes, a "Tony Boyer" hummer can, as long as it lasts, make a competent shooter a world class shooter.

OK, all the above is just a description about how different people use the same word to mean different things. If you've been around BR awhile, you already know that. What follows is just my opinion.

That "long as it lasts" part is tricky. In CF, that's about 250 rounds at the world-class competition level. Oddly enough, in 1,000 yard shooting, with all the wind conditions, it will last longer. There is a reason that the new 10-shot, single group world record just recently went into the high twos. It isn't because long-range shooters can't shoot.

OK number 2: Where RF and CF part company is in RF, a barrel lasts longer. But also in CF, you load your own ammunition, in RF, no. Which is most important? Don't think that's the right way to look at it. It takes both. The problem, as with all benchrest shooting, is the skill, the experience needed to evaluate both.

And for success, don't forget reading conditions. A hummer only helps you with small mistakes. (As a note that doesn't apply to point-blank BR, reading conditions only matters when the wind is terrible in 1,000 yard BR. Maybe 200 yard RF is similar, I don't know.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top