Some discussion on the "new" IBS target, please.

JerrySharrett

JerrySharrett

Senile Member
Since I, for sure, don't know all the details on the new IBS target, I would like to hear some discussion about it. At the just completed IBS Group Nationals a "new" target was used. The principal difference in this target and the previous target is the line weights for the rings are much thinner. At a range, especially one like Holton where mirage is bad, the new target is much more difficult to see.

The population of the Group benchrest community is getting older and consequently their (our) eyesight is getting weaker. If this thinning of the lines is to aid the ones doing the scoring maybe we should get them a big magnifying glass!! We, for sure, are not going to get shooters with better eyesight.

On one 200 yard event I even used a 3X booster on a Leupold Competition 45X scope. No better sight view, just more mirage.

I heard many negative comments about this new target and some concern about that if this is not the "legal" target, what if someone shot a new record??

What is the story here guys and gals??
 
IBS Taqrgets

Jerry I agree with your post.

I think the person who authorized the new target should get the pleasure of shooting on them the rest of their life.
Let the rest of us shoot on the standard (Normally used) heavier-wider 10 ring.

Let us try to standardize something in Benchrest between IBS and NBRSA----Maybe start with the targets????
Maybe 1 target approved by both organizations?????????????
Clubs that host IBS and NBRSA Matches both have to have separate targets for each organization adding to their expense to host matches.
One approved target for both would eliminate this expense making it easier on clubs to host matches.
Maybe a standardized target for both organization has the potential to be a cheaper target to produce, maybe a win-win for both organizations.
I see no down side for this standardized target for both organizations.
Is this to much to ask for ???

What was aggravating about these targets was that not all shooters had these targets--some were the regular 10 ring thickness (Fairness??????).

Decision Making and Quality control issues need to be addressed by the IBS powers that make decisions--Especially at a National Tournament.

Just my opinion
CLP
 
The target is question has not been approved by the IBS whatsoever. We had a couple hundred of the thin line mothball targets made as an experiment. They were to be used only in warm-up matches. The printer, Orrville Printing, is well aware that they were a special, run and not be be used in competition. I just learned yesterday that staff at the printer used the design to print additional targets....and they got sent to Holton as part of the order.

You have heard of "printer's error" - this is one of them. My apologies to all who had to endure this problem. We are working with Orrville Printing to make sure no more go out the door.

Jeff Stover
 
New IBS Target

There were lots of complaints at Holton about the "new" target. The mirage was not that bad (for Holton), but it was still difficult to see the donut at 200yds. The lack of definition of the center ring made it very difficult to run a group at 200yds with no hesitation.

I agree with the previous poster who said that the person or persons who came up with the idea of having the donut ring the same thickness as the outside rings should have to shoot it the rest of their lives and let everyone else shoot the "old target"

Dean
 
Jeff Stover said:
The target is question has not been approved by the IBS whatsoever. We had a couple hundred of the thin line mothball targets made as an experiment.
Jeff Stover
Click to expand...

Why? What?? Whose idea was this???

Why change the legacy target we have been shooting for years?

What is the supposed advantage of having a target that is harder to see, especially shooters with weaker eyesight??

Whose??? Yes, whose stupid idea was this???

(Sorry Wilbur about the stupid word usage)
 
response

Jeff

After I posted, I saw your response to the previous threads.....would not have sent my response had I seen yours first.

Dean
 
If there is one thing that will dampen the attendance at matches it will be to make the target harder to see. I will digress to 1972 when I started shooting highpower. The over the course targets (which were changed to the decimal version right before I started shooting) had only the X, 10 and 9 rings in black. Shooting the 200 yard stages were no problem. But, the trouble in seeing the target at 300 and 600 yards was a real challenge - one that I could not overcome due to minus 11 diopters in both eyes wearing street glasses. I was convinced that my scores would not go up any and frustration was to rule of the day every time I went out to train. Then around the middle 70's the NRA changed all of the highpower targets to include the 8 ring in the black. Wow! That really made it a lot easier to actually see a complete sight picture for the first time! And it also brought in new shooters as well. I can remember visitors coming out to the range and would be commenting on the 300 yard line "what are you shooting at" when we were still shooting the old (first) decimal targets.

My point is.....The current benchrest target is hard enough for me to see (if not impossible) in heavy mirage let alone in light mirage. Why experiment to make it more difficult to see? That worries me since i just started shooting benchrest two years ago. I would not want to revisit bad memories all over again.

Matt
 
I thought something was different with the targets. At 200 yds, I thought something was wrong with my scope cause you couldn't hardly see them even with mild mirage. Glad it won't be hanging around anymore...

Hovis
 
I just looked at some old NBRSA targets the line weight is much larger, on all lines, than this target we just shot.

I remember a few years ago we shot a nationals of one organization on the targets that had the logo of the other organization. I believe it was an IBS Nationals and we shot NBRSA targets???
 
I would like to see the same thickness in the lines we have in the NBRSA BUT change the line color from BLACK to BLUE. Most shooters can not tell the difference in the color when shooting but I believe it will get you a better measurement on your group since you will not have a black line to intefere with the impact of the bullet on the target.
 
Tom Libby said:
I would like to see the same thickness in the lines we have in the NBRSA BUT change the line color from BLACK to BLUE. Most shooters can not tell the difference in the color when shooting but I believe it will get you a better measurement on your group since you will not have a black line to intefere with the impact of the bullet on the target.
Click to expand...

You may have that good of eyesight Tom but many of us don't. As to blue, the IBS went to the blue on the 600 yard target and it is a disaster, IMO. Blue does not provide the contrast on a buff target as does black. If the person scoring the targets can not see bullet holes in the black we need to hire a new stats person.

The object is to be able to see the target definition to allow accurate aming, not make it easy on the person doing te measuring!
 
Jerry: I looked at my targets and I had 3 record targets with the smaller 10 ring. And the same number that were used as a warm up target. The 3 record targets were for the Unlimited so I did not even notice it till it was brought up. It would have been a problem if they were on my bag gun targets. Hope this does not happen again. Tony
 
And why not just leave them bold black like they have been for decades. What is to be proved here?? What would changing the target now do to the integrity of the existing records?

Top shooters like Jim Carstensen who have good eyesight, the new format may not be a problem but many older shooters like myself who have deteriorating eyesight, this new target is a B****!!

How about GREEN?? Then benchrest can join the new and wonderful GREEN revolution (and make ALGORE another 500 million)!!
 
Jerry - this was simply an EXPERIMENT and not intended for registered competition. The intent was to make mothball thinner so that groups that form in the center are not at a scoring disadvantage.
 
JerrySharrett said:
You may have that good of eyesight Tom but many of us don't. As to blue, the IBS went to the blue on the 600 yard target and it is a disaster, IMO. Blue does not provide the contrast on a buff target as does black. If the person scoring the targets can not see bullet holes in the black we need to hire a new stats person.

The object is to be able to see the target definition to allow accurate aming, not make it easy on the person doing te measuring!
Click to expand...

Jerry

The guys at the Piedmont club don't seem to have any trouble with blue targets.

Dave
 
I know this is about the IBS targets that where a test and it was about the thickness of the lines and not the color. With the same thickness of lines but using Blue does not seem to be a problem with the 600 yard targets that I have received to be measured for records. And as Jackie mentioned Red works and is used for the VFS matches and is not a problem just keep all of them with the same thickness as the Black.

With the scopes we have now and the power that should help a lot from a few years ago. With a heavy mirage not matter what color the target you have trouble with the rings.

Our sport as long as I have been shooting it has had a problem with even some reasonable change or try something and if it does not work accept it and then either modify the change or go back to the original starting point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top