You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
IBS Winter Meeting this weekend
- Thread starter Jeff Stover
- Start date
Yes Joe, I get it. I also have a rather expensive front rest that happens to be the latest in technology, and provides NO competitive advantage. It is clearly a fact, that the IBS, with it's antiquated rules, has lost a large number of potential members. Whether I win, lose, or draw in a match matters not at all to me. But, if I am told I can't use a bag setup that gives me ZERO advantage, and even though when measured out to out, it is more than 4" in length, but not a "single" piece bag, i'll take my latest technology front rest and spend my money elsewhere. If that means traveling distances where SEB rests are legal, so be it.
Maybe i'm missing something but they do sell a Seb Neo rest that is legal….. one piece bag. And you can put one in there for 35.00 from protector. I spent a lot more than that making mine legal. What i see is there is a distinct advantage with the three bag set up….. You trap the forearm when you tighten the side bags up, so you are basically running a rail gun. I really don't see where that is legal anywhere……… I have a friend i showed him that and he didn't even tighten the sides up…… you can pick the rest up with the fore end……. so if you have a lot of torque, it is a advantage…… jim
Jim yes the rules say you have to be able to lift the rifle out of the bag without disturbing the rest, and it can only go up the side of the stock 1/2''. Yes they do sell a one piece bag for the Seb Rest, so I would encourage anyone that buys one to get the one piece bag. At least till It voted on by both Organizations.
Joe Salt
Joe Salt
RStiefl Please read this I didn't write it! The part that says Replaced with. Rule References THE BAG
LR #2: Amend rulebook in Section VII.A.7 (Long Range) to remove requirement of ½” clearance
between a rest’s sandbag container/retainer and any part of the rifle. Replace with “A front
sandbag must maintain ½” in thickness and must be the only means of support at the rifle’s
forend”. There was some discussion between the disciplines why this was an issue more for long
range vs. short range. It was explained that the long range rule references the bag surround while
the short range rule (in the definitions) does not.
LR#2 Passed.
Meeting adjourned
Joe Salt
LR #2: Amend rulebook in Section VII.A.7 (Long Range) to remove requirement of ½” clearance
between a rest’s sandbag container/retainer and any part of the rifle. Replace with “A front
sandbag must maintain ½” in thickness and must be the only means of support at the rifle’s
forend”. There was some discussion between the disciplines why this was an issue more for long
range vs. short range. It was explained that the long range rule references the bag surround while
the short range rule (in the definitions) does not.
LR#2 Passed.
Meeting adjourned
Joe Salt
RStiefl Please read this I didn't write it! The part that says Replaced with. Rule References THE BAG
LR #2: Amend rulebook in Section VII.A.7 (Long Range) to remove requirement of ½” clearance
between a rest’s sandbag container/retainer and any part of the rifle. Replace with “A front
sandbag must maintain ½” in thickness and must be the only means of support at the rifle’s
forend”. There was some discussion between the disciplines why this was an issue more for long
range vs. short range. It was explained that the long range rule references the bag surround while
the short range rule (in the definitions) does not.
LR#2 Passed.
Meeting adjourned
Joe Salt
This is the new rule that was voted on but if you look in other places the 1/2" contact is still in place and with the way your side bag tension screws are located, the have to push above the 1/2" contact area. A stock that has 1/2" sides it will trap it or a stock that has sides greater than a 1/2" it will have contact greater than the rule allows.
On the bag size the rule book under general rules #7 says front bags shall be 1 1/2" wide and 4" long min. I had two Neo's so this isn't my first rodeo. They are very easy to make comply and maybe they will clean all the rules up to make the rest legal but let me ask you this if you built a light gun that weighed 18 pounds are they suppose to change the rules just for you? It is a real slap in the face to all those that make their equipment comply with the rules. The IBS rolled over to make it legal but missed some other parts that don't. ….jim
It is a shame that the IBS didn't change all the rules to make the Seb Neo legal, but when Farley came out and they were not legal the people that had them made them legal. I can see a little preferential treatment for the sake of numbers. All you can ask for is a level playing field…….. not let it degrade because of attendance……. jim
RStiefel I'll ask you the same thing I asked Z on 6mm BR.What part of BAG don't you understand? Not Three pieces! I don't care how thick they are the rule has been in place for 40+ years and because you and 10 others want it changed were going rewrite the rule book, I don't think so.
Joe Salt
Joe Salt
Other than the bag dimensions on the early models, the rests were/are legal. The rule states "single bag". Nowhere is the term one piece bag stated. I can cut one leg off my pants, and reattach it with safety pins, or velcro, to remove it whenever I choose. Either way, it is a single pant. The word "single" does not mean one piece. A custom pool cue is made up from several pieces. Yet, it is a "single" stick. The interpretation of "single" to so many, for so many years, has meant one piece, which isn't correct Jim.
Nowhere did i state single bag, it says #7 from the general rule says bags and it does give a min. size of 1 1/2" X 4" BAGS. Williamsport rule says BAG. You can harp on this all you want and you sir are wrong but i just state what is in the rule book. Now with the new bags on the NEO you still have to comply with the 1/2" rule and with the tension screw as high as they are, you had best figure how to do that…….. but have fun ,i'm done……… jim
Jim I don't think the screw would be a problem as long as the bag is 1/2" over the retainer! See you all in the SPRING. You guys that disagree with the rule must have voted for OBAMA.
Joe Salt
Joe, What it is, the tension screw is too high above the the bottom bag and you can't fill the bottom bag to get it high enough, so the side plates won't move. So it either traps or has too much contact with the sides of the fore arm and the 1/2" rules comes in to play.After all this i came to the conclusion the fix was simple replace it with a a single bag. I didn't raise a fuss, i just sold them…… jim
The rest was an as new Sinclair Generation I, that I listed as a freebee to anyone willing to make a donation to the site. You happened to be the one to take advantage of the offer. I believe you were kind enough to give it to a less than fortunate new shooter?
Yes, I gave it to a young guy starting out.... he's even made it to a couple match's and used it !.!.!
Couldn't remember for sure if it was you or not, user names throw me off.....
D
dk hunt 14
Guest
Not arguing the rule Joe. It's actually quite clear. A "single" front bag. If the intent was to mean a one piece bag, the rule would state exactly that! However, it doesn't! It's obvious, the governing committee agrees that a single bag can consist of more than one piece. Unfortunately, old beliefs die hard!!!
You need to get the Webster Dictionary and look up the definition of single. Matt
Matt -
You had me curious, since your rules say "Matches will be fired using a single sand bag front rest"
So I looked it up.... lol
Websters Dictionary: <> definition of "single"
: consisting of or having only one part, feature, or portion
: not having or including another : only one
You had me curious, since your rules say "Matches will be fired using a single sand bag front rest"
So I looked it up.... lol
Websters Dictionary: <> definition of "single"
: consisting of or having only one part, feature, or portion
: not having or including another : only one
gonehunting378
tom m.
Joe,
The ibs and also your club honored the 3.048" by Joel.. he had 2 bags, one for each ski, the bags didn't even touch each other. One of our shooters asked me if he could build a heavy gun of similar design. I called your president at the time, and he said it would be okay.
I can see how an underslung barrel is an advantage. I can't see how this 3 part bag is whatsoever. We can only enforce what is written in black and white, so maybe it's time for a rewrite? Keep in mind the neo didn't exist in nineteen hundred and sixtyeight.
What is written in plain English is two things that are clear. 1-if your side contacts .501" or more it is illegal. And 2-if it or anything else stops upward or rearward movement, it is illegal.
From my point of view as a shooter, I don't care. Write the rules and I will go over and above to comply with them. As a shooter/ volunteer of MY time and efforts.. write them very CLEARLY, so there is no doubt, it either IS or it IS NOT legal. Kind of hard to get people to volunteer their time to be referees and match directors if everyone is pissed because their equipment is legal at one range but not at yours. It's not my job to interpret what the hell they meant to write, but left the words out. We need words dammit, lol!
Everyone take a breath, I'm sure I won't regret involving myself in this thread..... I hope.
Joe, if you had a wife on each arm you had better watch your usage of the word "bag".
Tom
The ibs and also your club honored the 3.048" by Joel.. he had 2 bags, one for each ski, the bags didn't even touch each other. One of our shooters asked me if he could build a heavy gun of similar design. I called your president at the time, and he said it would be okay.
I can see how an underslung barrel is an advantage. I can't see how this 3 part bag is whatsoever. We can only enforce what is written in black and white, so maybe it's time for a rewrite? Keep in mind the neo didn't exist in nineteen hundred and sixtyeight.
What is written in plain English is two things that are clear. 1-if your side contacts .501" or more it is illegal. And 2-if it or anything else stops upward or rearward movement, it is illegal.
From my point of view as a shooter, I don't care. Write the rules and I will go over and above to comply with them. As a shooter/ volunteer of MY time and efforts.. write them very CLEARLY, so there is no doubt, it either IS or it IS NOT legal. Kind of hard to get people to volunteer their time to be referees and match directors if everyone is pissed because their equipment is legal at one range but not at yours. It's not my job to interpret what the hell they meant to write, but left the words out. We need words dammit, lol!
Everyone take a breath, I'm sure I won't regret involving myself in this thread..... I hope.
Joe, if you had a wife on each arm you had better watch your usage of the word "bag".
Tom
R
RStiefel
Guest
One-piece:
"Consisting of or made in a single undivided piece".
Since all front bags are made up of more than a single piece, and many of them containing more than one type of material,
by definition, every front bag would be rendered illegal for use. The modern three piece design gives no competitor an advantage. It's nothing more than modern, well designed craftsmanship.
"Consisting of or made in a single undivided piece".
Since all front bags are made up of more than a single piece, and many of them containing more than one type of material,
by definition, every front bag would be rendered illegal for use. The modern three piece design gives no competitor an advantage. It's nothing more than modern, well designed craftsmanship.
Tom the rule has always been SANDBAG, We allowed Joel's rifle because it was on a single bag on each rail, I don't care if you have 4 rails as long as there on a bag! With the three bag system you can trap the rifle and unless your real honest thats just what will happen. That rest works like a vice, Thats the reason I myself don't think it should be legal. I've even tried doing it with mine to see if I could pull the gun up out of the bag without lifting the rest, I could not. OH I can tell you this about Wife's! THEY ARE ALL SISTERS.
Joe salt
Joe salt