Resuolts for 3/15/09 Temecula BR match

L

ldurham

Guest
Results for 3/15/09 Temecula BR match

4190.1

We had a really fine match yesterday, despite cold and blustery weather, with no hint of the sun until the shooting was over and the grill was heating up for our traditional post-match potluck cookout.

We have been experimenting with various shooting formats, and have switched from 30yd shooting, to 50yds. Yesterday we were shooting ten three-shot groups per target, with scores being the ctc measurements tallied and averaged over three targets with ten groups each, for a total of thirty groups per shooter.

I had installed a backer frame 4 feet behind the regular frame to allow us to validate how many shots were in a REALLY tight group, and it was used on one occasion, where a three shot group of only .028" ctc spread was fired! The extra backer clearly showed the three shots because the pellets began to spread a bit when the exited the target, and though still tight, the three separate holes could be clearly seen.

Anyhow, there was, as usual, gusty, switching, tricky wind. Now, we DO shoot from inside my garage, but from what I can see, the fact that our shooting position is protected actually makes it MUCH harder to judge wind changes in direction and intensity, since you can't feel any wind on your face and body. I looked over the targets and every shooter fired one group of an inch or more ctc, and all shooters seemed to have at least one or more groups under a quarter inch ctc.

All shooters were using USFT rifles except Tim McMurray, who was using his Simple Simon. Bench equipment ranged from standard front rest/rear bag setups where you raise the front with a jackscrew and slide or squeeze the rear bag for windage, to an elaborate "one piece" rest, with precise adjustment knobs for both windage and elevation. There were a couple high zoot Farley front rests, and I was using my new Lever-action Caldwell front rest. I used my Field Target rifle, and I loaned Scott DeCapio (who was visiting from Colorado) my "Hunter USFT" that has been used as the prototype mule for many projects, the latest being for development of a benchrest conversion kit for the regular USFT's. One shooter, Matt Kellerman, used a .22 cal carbine Hunter, while the rest used .177.

The data we collected from this match is pretty important to me, since it demonstrates the true capability of decent air rifle/shooter combinations firing from good support, but under adverse shooting conditions pretty well.

I'll be keeping that target with my .028" ctc group for awhile!

Here are some overall results:

Aggregate for thirty, three shot* groups:

T. McMurray, 1st, .515"

L. Durham, 2nd, .525"

S. DeCapio, 3rd, .529"

M. Kellerman, 4th, .575"

J. Harris, 5th, .605"

R. Lovett, 6th, .656"

Reading the flags is the key to fifty yard shooting!

*(Corrected from previous posting that said five shot groups in error)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oops! You are absoolutely correct

Thirty three shoot groups!
 
Air vs Burning powder

Okay, it appears you are shooting Air Guns, but how about some more info on the equipment. Three shots doesn't really tell the turn capability of the equipment nor the shooter, so why did you go to this format, and who sanctions it?
 
Well, Fred,

I did say they were all USFT rifles but one, how much more info do you need, since you apparently feel the aggregates of thirty GROUPS per shooter, fired from fifty yards isnt useful enough for you? Heck, even the aggregate of all shooters using the same kind of gun* (equalling 180 groups fired using the same type gun under the same conditions) could be easily determined by that data, but I doubt you would be impressed of anything there either.

Frankly, I have yet to see BETTER data from any long range outdoor airgun shooting for a given set of conditions.

As to sanctioning, well, its ME, and the other Temecula Airgun Club shooters that are sanctioning it, I guess.

Sorry, I guess I need to admit we were shooting mostly for OUR pleasure, rather than yours.

*the Simple simon was the handbuilt prototype of the USFT, which I built in the same garage we were shooting from. The guy shooting it is the guy that builds the USFT's , of which he has sent out around 140 of em or so all over the country, to be used in outdoor airgun matches.
 
I don't think there is ONE ideal format for airgun br. Group shooting has it's draws and score shooting has it's own joys and there is room for both. At my club's centerfire matches we alternate every month.

I have only shot in one AGBR match and have only fired about 10 targets in practice but I already think the AGBR target is flawed and/or the 25 yd distance may be too short so I can see where LD would be wanting to experiment with the target.
 
Experimenting

One of my favorite targets for both rimfire and airguns has always been the NRA A36 12 bull target we are currently using.

I was interested in trying group shooting contests, but my own tests showed the regular airgun distance of 25yds was too easy, giving such tight groups for everyone that scoring would be a crapshoot. It was also near impossible to judge how many shots were fired by simply looking at a target with a bunch of 5 shot groups on it, since most groups had multiple shots in the same hole.

By going to fifty yards, esp in an area that was nearly always windy, due to the location on a hill that had breeze coming up a valley on the property 300 days a year, I was assured that most groups would open up enough to make it challenging, and make scoring easier. How windy? Well, its pretty standard to see hole appear nearly three inches off the aimpoint on the sighters during the gusts, and its rare to not see an inch of drift in the more steady condition I like to shoot (one doesnt dare shoot when the flags seem to stop moving, as there little telling WHERE it will go).

But the scoring is STILL tedious, and a little subjective with calipers reading by eye, so we will prolly try shooting for score using the same target and shot count.

We have three concrete benches on the shooting line, and its about all we have room for, so we normally have two relays to accommodate the shooters. We do have a smaller metal bench, but its not preferred by most shooters, so we usually just use the three concrete ones. Point is, if we fired ten groups of five shots, the relays would be too long, and also, scoring would be more difficult with respect to shot count verification if we shot groups, or scoring points if we used the scoring rings. I think one to three shots per target is about the best all around with the targets we have.

BTW, Mac1 has donated a thousand fresh new targets, and he got em for around $0.08 each. Try finding good 11"X14" targets, and you will know we are doing the right thing.
 
We were using 20 minutes

robb frazier said:
L D

Is there a time limit on the match?
Click to expand...
------------

Just as a trial ... it was a little tight, but worked. I don't want shooters to "wait for the wind condition they prefer" every shot, since its more challenging to learn more about holding off anyhow.

It does appear that a "joystick type" front rest that can quickly traverse from sighter to record target and back gives more time to shoot, but then again, the one-piece type rest seems more precise once on target.
 
LD SS/US FT/Hunter History

US FT's are based on the 7th handbuilt LD SS (Simple Simon) rifle Larry Durham made for me. He was going to make 12 rifles to compete in American 20 fpe Field Target but since the 2nd gun he made won the Nats in '02 (shooter was Steve Schulz) his goal was already reached and he decided he wouldn't make the full dozen.

Larry Durham's considerable design and engineering experience was graciously donated to the cause and he has nutured the project from the onset. When LD SS #2 took the Nats in '02 I decided I would make a limited production version. The demand for the guns has far exceeded my wildest expectations and I'm a natural born optimist.

Production US FT rifles won the FT Nats in '05 with Number 6 (Billy Lo) and '07 (Paul Cray) and then Paul went on to win the FT World Championship in '07 as well. Marvin Reynolds shot his US FT in '08 to win Nats BR championship.

I've delivered 142 rifles now between the US FT and the Hunter which is based on the same LD designed format. Hunters were originally available as Upright or canted guns while US FT's are all canted rifles. They share the same valving, triggers and tubes and only differ at the Barrel mount which decides whether they are canted or upright.

Future Hunters will all be uprights and I've decuided to fit them with 16Mm barrels like the US FT's as soon as we make more barrel mounts. Many Hunter barrel mounts have been machined to accept 16MM barrels. I've got one more canted Hunter barrel mount and probably 20 more uprights.

The goal was to show the rest of the world that American makers can make accurate guns and I believe that was accomplished with the World FT Championship.

It has been a dream come true for me to finally get the chance to provide serious gear to the most discriminating customers. It is a lot of work but infinitely rewarding.

We provide each customer with a 12-15 shot group at 51 yards off a BR rest to prove the guns capability and check our work. If they don't get-em all under a nickel they go back for more work. Most guns shoot inside a dime.

I recently decided to tunnel test all Hunters rather than make it an option so the cost of Hunters has gone up to $1900. It is available with the standard wood forearm and angled butt for hunting or the BR options for the same price. BR guns have a straight butt stub, rear bag rest on the bottom of the butt plate and a channel alluminum 3" wide forearm that clamps nicely in most rests.

US FT's set-up for Field Target are $2300. BR parts kits are $100 more for Gen II rifles and $150 for Gen I US FT rifles which need to include the Gen II butt plate to be used in BR.

Production engineering has been shared between Larry and I as I'm always interested in his fruitful input. He rarely fails to have a strong opinion about his pet project. Contrary to what many have assumed Larry has no ownership interest in Mac1 Airgun. His help has been purely out of generosity, friendship and his love of Airguns.

I'm still waiting for other manufACTURERS TO SHOW US THE GROUPS BUT THEY SEEM CONTENT TO POLISH EXTERNALS RATHER THAN FOCUS ON WHAT COUNTS. Sorry for shouting! Darn cap lock!

I shoot my #7 Simple Simon in BR and my #7 Carbine US FT in Field Target. I can't stand to see accurate guns go unused. We are adamantly against building closet queens.

My personalized plate on my Supercharged Tacoma is US FT 07 and has been since '06 when I decided we would do everything in our power to win the FT worlds.

The BR match I won this last weekend was done with a borrowed Farley rest and I was in rare form to shoot as good as I did. Last month I took 2nd with a .568 agg but this month I wouldn't be denied. My goal is to shoot under a .5aggregate.
I know the gun can do it if I can keep my composure.

Thanks to LD for running the match. It was obvious a great deal of fun was had by all.

Later

Tim

Mac1 Airgun
310-327-3581
mac1airgun@att.net
 
Usft

These are some of the best PCP air rilfes on the market today in MHO. I've got a hunter model with a .177 and 22 barrels. The workmanship is the best I've seen lately.
Larry Burchfield
 
It's great that you have guys to come out. At my first match of the year nobody showed up. If that happens again in April I might throw in the towel and just concentrate on my Centerfire BR stuff. I know it takes time to generate some interest and get a core of dedicated shooters coming to the events but it is still disheartening.

At our club's first CF match this year the conditions were absolutely miserable. Low to mid 40's and light rain most of the day. Nonetheless, 9 guys showed up to shoot.
 
Try demo'ing the airgun game at the centerfire match if you can!

Seems if you showed em a way to do BR with no reloading or high ammo costs, you might get some takers?
 
I planned on doing that at the March event but with it raining and miserable I decided to leave the ag at home.
 
That sounds good...but

This is my test target and as you can see this guns clearly did not meet benchrest or field target standards as it left your shop.
The gun was plagued with problems from the start and is still being sorted out to this day.
As far as the statement Americans can build air guns is concerned my gun clearly demonstrated it was a work in progress even though I paid $1730.40 for the pleasure and that included the $50 for the infamous tunnel test.
One can only hope for $2300 you get a gun with all of the problems SOLVED not INCLUDED with the gun.
As for shiny European guns my Rapid's , Falcon's , Daystate's , all arrived problem free save one and all shoot rings around the Hunter in every respect.

Doug Shea


Tim McMurray said:
US FT's are based on the 7th handbuilt LD SS (Simple Simon) rifle Larry Durham made for me. He was going to make 12 rifles to compete in American 20 fpe Field Target but since the 2nd gun he made won the Nats in '02 (shooter was Steve Schulz) his goal was already reached and he decided he wouldn't make the full dozen.

Larry Durham's considerable design and engineering experience was graciously donated to the cause and he has nutured the project from the onset. When LD SS #2 took the Nats in '02 I decided I would make a limited production version. The demand for the guns has far exceeded my wildest expectations and I'm a natural born optimist.

Production US FT rifles won the FT Nats in '05 with Number 6 (Billy Lo) and '07 (Paul Cray) and then Paul went on to win the FT World Championship in '07 as well. Marvin Reynolds shot his US FT in '08 to win Nats BR championship.

I've delivered 142 rifles now between the US FT and the Hunter which is based on the same LD designed format. Hunters were originally available as Upright or canted guns while US FT's are all canted rifles. They share the same valving, triggers and tubes and only differ at the Barrel mount which decides whether they are canted or upright.

Future Hunters will all be uprights and I've decuided to fit them with 16Mm barrels like the US FT's as soon as we make more barrel mounts. Many Hunter barrel mounts have been machined to accept 16MM barrels. I've got one more canted Hunter barrel mount and probably 20 more uprights.

The goal was to show the rest of the world that American makers can make accurate guns and I believe that was accomplished with the World FT Championship.

It has been a dream come true for me to finally get the chance to provide serious gear to the most discriminating customers. It is a lot of work but infinitely rewarding.

We provide each customer with a 12-15 shot group at 51 yards off a BR rest to prove the guns capability and check our work. If they don't get-em all under a nickel they go back for more work. Most guns shoot inside a dime.

I recently decided to tunnel test all Hunters rather than make it an option so the cost of Hunters has gone up to $1900. It is available with the standard wood forearm and angled butt for hunting or the BR options for the same price. BR guns have a straight butt stub, rear bag rest on the bottom of the butt plate and a channel alluminum 3" wide forearm that clamps nicely in most rests.

US FT's set-up for Field Target are $2300. BR parts kits are $100 more for Gen II rifles and $150 for Gen I US FT rifles which need to include the Gen II butt plate to be used in BR.

Production engineering has been shared between Larry and I as I'm always interested in his fruitful input. He rarely fails to have a strong opinion about his pet project. Contrary to what many have assumed Larry has no ownership interest in Mac1 Airgun. His help has been purely out of generosity, friendship and his love of Airguns.

I'm still waiting for other manufACTURERS TO SHOW US THE GROUPS BUT THEY SEEM CONTENT TO POLISH EXTERNALS RATHER THAN FOCUS ON WHAT COUNTS. Sorry for shouting! Darn cap lock!

I shoot my #7 Simple Simon in BR and my #7 Carbine US FT in Field Target. I can't stand to see accurate guns go unused. We are adamantly against building closet queens.

My personalized plate on my Supercharged Tacoma is US FT 07 and has been since '06 when I decided we would do everything in our power to win the FT worlds.

The BR match I won this last weekend was done with a borrowed Farley rest and I was in rare form to shoot as good as I did. Last month I took 2nd with a .568 agg but this month I wouldn't be denied. My goal is to shoot under a .5aggregate.
I know the gun can do it if I can keep my composure.

Thanks to LD for running the match. It was obvious a great deal of fun was had by all.

Later

Tim

Mac1 Airgun
310-327-3581
mac1airgun@att.net
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • 000_2288.jpg
    000_2288.jpg
    34.9 KB · Views: 189
You should send it back

I stand behind what I build. If it doesn't deliver what you expect then let me see what I can do to fix it.

Later

Tim
 
Yes, to me, that target doesnt appear to meet FT standards

But then again, to me, that gun wasnt intended to compete in FT matches. It is my feeling that the "Hunter version" was intended for hunting, and not competition use, though in fact I personally DO have a "Hunter version set up for Benchrest use.

The hunter uses a thinner, lighter barrel, and I have found its harder to get accurate ones in that dia in the HW brand. But more importantly, I have found MOST .22 cal HW barrels are not sufficiently accurate for Benchrest competition.

The first USFT set up for benchrest shooting I saw was my one, which began as a .22 last year, then I tried 5mm, then went to .177. I also built a benchrest gun based on the Field Target version last year that was intended soley for bench shooting, and its a pretty good one.

No guns Tim built prior to this year as .22 Hunter models that I have seen were sufficiently accurate for serious competition, and I assumed they must have been for hunting.

I finally got a skinny .177 barrel to work ok on mine, so its still on that gun now. The forend and butt arrangement I developed for this particular gun have been used as a model for some guns Tim has made lately for folks wanting to try benchrest with his guns.

These guns only shoot as well as the barrel fitted and the pellets available, and I feel a bench gun needs a more exceptional barrel than the average .22 cal airgun barrels I've seen readily available. Even most .177 barrels arent good enough, but I have seen better accuracy from more .177 barrels than any other caliber.

All that said, Doug, I'm surprised you waited over three years to mention your gun is unsatisfactory to you?
 
LD, thats like saying the gun was NEVER meant to be accurate in the first place.
I spoke to Tim within days of receiving and testing the gun his explanation was the problem lay within the trigger and to squirt a little Rem Oil in it.
No matter how you look at it the gun should have never been shipped to a customer knowing full well the test target provided was the best the gun could do.
If you knowingly build a gun with lower quality components yet promote the gun as top quality that is just wrong no matter how you slice it.
The gun has a few nice features its sad the time needed to refine them apparently was not used.
The test target speaks for itself no matter what excuse is used.
Killing a living thing deserves just as much accuracy as shooting 10 and X.
Doug


ldurham said:
But then again, to me, that gun wasnt intended to compete in FT matches. It is my feeling that the "Hunter version" was intended for hunting, and not competition use, though in fact I personally DO have a "Hunter version set up for Benchrest use.

The hunter uses a thinner, lighter barrel, and I have found its harder to get accurate ones in that dia in the HW brand. But more importantly, I have found MOST .22 cal HW barrels are not sufficiently accurate for Benchrest competition.

The first USFT set up for benchrest shooting I saw was my one, which began as a .22 last year, then I tried 5mm, then went to .177. I also built a benchrest gun based on the Field Target version last year that was intended soley for bench shooting, and its a pretty good one.

No guns Tim built prior to this year as .22 Hunter models that I have seen were sufficiently accurate for serious competition, and I assumed they must have been for hunting.

I finally got a skinny .177 barrel to work ok on mine, so its still on that gun now. The forend and butt arrangement I developed for this particular gun have been used as a model for some guns Tim has made lately for folks wanting to try benchrest with his guns.

These guns only shoot as well as the barrel fitted and the pellets available, and I feel a bench gun needs a more exceptional barrel than the average .22 cal airgun barrels I've seen readily available. Even most .177 barrels arent good enough, but I have seen better accuracy from more .177 barrels than any other caliber.

All that said, Doug, I'm surprised you waited over three years to mention your gun is unsatisfactory to you?
Click to expand...
 
Doug, a gun that shoots to the level the target depicts

Is fine for hunting, and in fact the level of accuracy is one that many normal hunting rimfires cannot deliver with standard hunting ammo. I suspect you, as well as MOST shooters are unaware how much a 25 shot group grows compared to the usual fiive shot groups we often fire, but I find the the area of such a group is often five or six times greater.

If you think all hunting airguns should be accurate enough to kill at any distance you want, you are missing a valuable point to any hunting ... which is, you MUST hunt within the limits of the gun and yourself combined. for most hunter/airgun combo's, I would say around 30-40yds is about the limit for very small game. I can hunt with a SLINGSHOT, but keep ranges under six yards or so.


Anyhow,

For comparison's sake, there are NO spring powered airguns I've ever fired from 50yds that can regularly duplicate the group you show, and very few .22 cal precharged guns. Yes, I know you may have seen many smaller groups, but I challenge you to try to duplicate them with a full 25 shots!

That said, my observation is that most .22 cal airgun barrels I have tested will not shoot accurately enough for FT competition, which was the use for which the USFT was designed. Its for this reason there are so very few .22 cal FT rifles being used of ANY make for FT matches. the hunter version, when fitted with a .177 barrel, will do nearly as well, but in my opinion, the .22 cal is ok for rabbits or vermin, but not so good for competition.

My experience with these particular guns may differ from Tim's, or your discussion leaves a little out, since its been my own experience that the barrel is essentially soley responsible for MOST of the accuracy assuming the rest of the gun is working normally.

The criteria I use personally for FT guns is sub-moa ctc groups at 51yds in my tunnel. I used to shoot twelve five shot groups, throw out the best and worst, then average the rest. Then I found that one 25 shot group that could be covered by a nickel was about the same.

Your group looks the size of a quarter, which is around a half pellet's width bigger than a nickel. This is typical for a very good shooting .22 cal air rifle at 51yds when you shoot that many shots into the same spot.

So Doug,

Just for the gain in knowledge it would surely give the entire readership, I challenge you to honestly and fairly shoot a full 25 shot group from 50 yards with the most accurate .22 cal airgun you own or can borrow and post the picture alongside a quarter, so we can all see, ok?.

Not to say I've NEVER seen one do better, but I have only seen perhaps two out of fifty that might do slightly better, and I want to see how your other .22 cal guns do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top