Sporter class stock

Yes, any forearm width, any butt angle. They also lifted the caliber restriction, and kept the weight the same. I tried to check my memory by looking at the revisions to the rule book, but that one is not there. I guess that the on line version has not been updated to reflect the change. I understand that very few rifles have been built to the new rule as far as the stock changes go. It does give shooters who prefer to shoot something other than 6mm the opportunity to shoot the same caliber in all classes.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Boyd. I thought I had read that somewhere. Wide open on the stock as long as the gun weighs 10.5. Got a Farley that I was going to do into a cruiser but this sounds like a lot more fun.
 
As a added note, the barrel taper rules are also suspended. As long as the Rifle does not weigh more than 10.5 pounds, or has return to battery features, just about anything goes.

The 10.5 pounds is the fly in the ointment.

Also, if you build a Rifle to take advantage of the new Sporter Specifications, you cannot shoot it in Heavy Varmint, Light Varmint, or Varmint for Score.
 
Last edited:
Jackie,

I'd like to see the barrel contour rule thrown out for all the classes. As long as the rifle make weight, what difference does the barrel contour make? I'm starting my 47th year of BR shooting, and have never had a barrel contour checked, so why have the rule.

FWIW
Steve Kostanich
 
Steve Kostanich said:
Jackie,

I'd like to see the barrel contour rule thrown out for all the classes. As long as the rifle make weight, what difference does the barrel contour make? I'm starting my 47th year of BR shooting, and have never had a barrel contour checked, so why have the rule.

FWIW
Steve Kostanich
Click to expand...

Good point.
 
The Sporter class still has the rule that the forend can't be concave. I guess the reasoning behind that is to keep from having a rifle running on rails. I've talked to some who have used the new stocks. It hasn't shot any better than the stocks used previously. If they did away with all the rules that aren't enforced, it would be a good start.
 
Steve Kostanich said:
Jackie,

I'd like to see the barrel contour rule thrown out for all the classes. As long as the rifle make weight, what difference does the barrel contour make? I'm starting my 47th year of BR shooting, and have never had a barrel contour checked, so why have the rule.

FWIW
Steve Kostanich
Click to expand...

DITTO that, Steve! :cool: RG
 
Maybe the best concept for Benchrest would have been just two classes, Unlimited and Limited, with the defining difference being a Limited Rifle could not possess true return to battery capabilities.

Score would be fired with a Limited Rifle.
 
jackie schmidt said:
Maybe the best concept for Benchrest would have been just two classes, Unlimited and Limited, with the defining difference being a Limited Rifle could not possess true return to battery capabilities.

Score would be fired with a Limited Rifle.
Click to expand...

How would we drag out a whole weekend of shootin?
 
The Two Gun Format is a double edge sword.

Yes, you get to shoot all week end. But there are lot of shooters, those that are not retired in particular, who find it a major burden.

And, since more and more ranges are opting for the 100-100 (Saturday), 200-200 (Sunday), you can't go and shoot for a Grand Agg in one day.

Here is an example. I would love to go over to New Braunfels and shoot the Bluebonnet. It's about a 3 hour drive. A prior commitment Sunday puts me in the position where I can't. But, I could drive over early Sat and shoot, but they do not shoot a Grand Agg on Sat, they shoot the 100yard legs.

Nice for the club, less work. Even less work because they will have one less target to hang and score.

The dirty little secret In Benchrest is that despite our best efforts, there still isn't a hill of beans difference in the three Bag Gun Classes. I would even venture a guess that the majority of the current records, except Mike Stinnet's single Group Record, are actually held by what used to be a 10.5 lb Sporter.

The only time a true 13.5 Heavy Varmint plays a big roll is when we shoot a 30 caliber in Varmint for Score. The three extra pounds don't beat you around so much after a whole days shooting.

It's an old argument. Nothing will change. The shooter with the great barrel and a great lot of bullets will still win whether that barrel is screwed into a LV, HV, or the new Sporter.
 
Last edited:
Good point Steve, I really never have understood The barrel contour rule. Like Steve said, what does barrel contour have to do with a gun as long as the gun makes weight?
 
Maybe it has something to do with the "NAME OF THE CLASS".
Who would have thought.

gabe ledesma said:
Good point Steve, I really never have understood The barrel contour rule. Like Steve said, what does barrel contour have to do with a gun as long as the gun makes weight?
Click to expand...
 
One thing that seems to be missing in this discussion is the history of the current bag gun classes. It is my understanding that in the beginning the thought was that except for the unlimited class, that benchrest rifles resemble rifles that are used in the field, and for that reason the toe lines of buttstocks are required to have a minimum angle, barrels a minimum taper, and weights limited. Another thing that should probably be mentioned is the continuity of records. If rules are changed very much, so that rifles built to the new rules have an accuracy advantage what does that do to the concept of breaking records? The last issue is economic. I understand that this sport is expensive, and that that limits participation. What do you think the effect would be if a new rifle feature became a virtual necessity to be competitive, obsoleting previous designs? Would shooter who could not afford to replace their current equipment quit? The rule changes that redefine the sporter class seem to have created a lot more discussion than new rifles. One highly placed source told me that he has only seen two rifles built to the new rules and that one was quickly withdrawn from competition during a match because it was not competitive. This lack of actual rifle building tells us that there is a big difference between daydreaming about rule changes and actually investing money following new rules.
 
jackie schmidt said:
Maybe the best concept for Benchrest would have been just two classes, Unlimited and Limited, with the defining difference being a Limited Rifle could not possess true return to battery capabilities.

Score would be fired with a Limited Rifle.
Click to expand...

Good luck with that concept Jackie. I am not saying it is a bad idea. But look at how long it took just to get Sporter changed from a simply redundant class to something different. And I do realize it is only changed in NBRSA.
 
Its a dead end with these current classes. Like jackie said we need an unlimited bag gun class. If i wanted to use a 26" straight barrel and a 5" wide stock for an experiment id have to compete against a rail gun.
 
I totally agree with Boyd’s post #15. Let’s keep the same guns and if records are to be broken then they should be of the same gun. Also have to agree with Jackie and Dusty on the unlimited bag gun class. So let’s just stop the Sporter as it is and keeps the record’s as they are then name a new class as the unlimited bag gun class. It to me seems only fair to those who have world records should only loose them with the same type of gun and equipment.

P.S. I personally have never came close to a World record only think it's fair to those you have.

Chet
 
Rather than repeat what has happened as a result of the sporter rule change, why not take surveys at every match, asking how many would actually build an unlimited bag gun, and from those responses compile a list.(...and compare it to the number who do)? In order for there to be meaningful competition that would be worthy of the attention of a national sanctioning body, I think that the number of shooters who line up to compete is a significant factor. Does anyone remember benchrest pistol? At the Visalia matches it was shot mixed in with the rifles but separate stats were kept. That was a way to try something without disrupting the routine, or increasing the costs of matches. Perhaps some of you could interest local shooters in building rifles that could be shot mixed in with existing classes keeping separate results. At some point, if there was enough interest, then a national level class could be created.
 
Boyd Allen said:
Rather than repeat what has happened as a result of the sporter rule change, why not take surveys at every match, asking how many would actually build an unlimited bag gun, and from those responses compile a list.(...and compare it to the number who do)? In order for there to be meaningful competition that would be worthy of the attention of a national sanctioning body, I think that the number of shooters who line up to compete is a significant factor. Does anyone remember benchrest pistol? At the Visalia matches it was shot mixed in with the rifles but separate stats were kept. That was a way to try something without disrupting the routine, or increasing the costs of matches. Perhaps some of you could interest local shooters in building rifles that could be shot mixed in with existing classes keeping separate results. At some point, if there was enough interest, then a national level class could be created.
Click to expand...

What shooters say they would do, and what they would actually do, are two different things.

I have a feeling that most shooters would enter the "Unlimited Bag Gun Class" with their HV, if they even have one of those.

The only reason I own a true 13.5 lb HV is because I shoot VFS with it chambered in 30BR. In fact, I haven't owned a HV in 6PPC in 15 years. No reason to.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top