tolerances
- Thread starter strever
- Start date
Official Targets
Dick,
Not sure but the Official targets come on flat stock and Glossy stock paper? Indoors under the lights the Glossy targets are useless! Not sure how they will do outside?
Paul
Dick,
Not sure but the Official targets come on flat stock and Glossy stock paper? Indoors under the lights the Glossy targets are useless! Not sure how they will do outside?
Paul
strever
Member
target printing tolerances
Paul
the target we are using now is the same target we shot in Oxnard outdoors which seems OK
i was ask what is the tolerances for printing and i searched not finding an answer
but this last hour i changed the search wording a little and found Mike Niksch asking the same question a year and half ago
and i did not see a real answer other then it is up to the printer ? wow
so if the printer prints the 10 ring 3 thousands smaller this time the scores will be less then last time when he printed the 10 ring 3 thousands larger
in other words are we allowing the printer +or- 3 thousands or +or- 6 thousands ???
one batch of printing will be nicer to us then another
or are we chomping down on the tolerances from the printer and only allowing +or- 1 or 2 thousands
i probably should be asking this to the rimfire boys
maybe we don't know the real answer
Joe who is in charge of checking the printer quality when we get targets ?
are there printers who can print within one thousands ?
are the dimensions to the outside of the ring or the middle ?
lots of questions but where would answers be ?
Dick
Paul
the target we are using now is the same target we shot in Oxnard outdoors which seems OK
i was ask what is the tolerances for printing and i searched not finding an answer
but this last hour i changed the search wording a little and found Mike Niksch asking the same question a year and half ago
and i did not see a real answer other then it is up to the printer ? wow
so if the printer prints the 10 ring 3 thousands smaller this time the scores will be less then last time when he printed the 10 ring 3 thousands larger
in other words are we allowing the printer +or- 3 thousands or +or- 6 thousands ???
one batch of printing will be nicer to us then another
or are we chomping down on the tolerances from the printer and only allowing +or- 1 or 2 thousands
i probably should be asking this to the rimfire boys
maybe we don't know the real answer
Joe who is in charge of checking the printer quality when we get targets ?
are there printers who can print within one thousands ?
are the dimensions to the outside of the ring or the middle ?
lots of questions but where would answers be ?
Dick
World target ring size
I noticed the first batch of targets the 10 ring seemed smaller than my last box of 300. But I have no accurate way of checking them like Mike has.
Paul
Dick is this what you want?Paul
the target we are using now is the same target we shot in Oxnard outdoors which seems OK
i was ask what is the tolerances for printing and i searched not finding an answer
but this last hour i changed the search wording a little and found Mike Niksch asking the same question a year and half ago
and i did not see a real answer other then it is up to the printer ? wow
so if the printer prints the 10 ring 3 thousands smaller this time the scores will be less then last time when he printed the 10 ring 3 thousands larger
in other words are we allowing the printer +or- 3 thousands or +or- 6 thousands ???
one batch of printing will be nicer to us then another
or are we chomping down on the tolerances from the printer and only allowing +or- 1 or 2 thousands
i probably should be asking this to the rimfire boys
maybe we don't know the real answer
Joe who is in charge of checking the printer quality when we get targets ?
are there printers who can print within one thousands ?
are the dimensions to the outside of the ring or the middle ?
lots of questions but where would answers be ?
Dick
I noticed the first batch of targets the 10 ring seemed smaller than my last box of 300. But I have no accurate way of checking them like Mike has.
Paul
Last edited:
D
Dave Shattuck
Guest
It's been awhile since I had targets printed, but as I remember the easiest way to make sure everything is as it should be is to make sure the outer edges of each target box measures exactly 2" across. If that is the case, then the rest will all follow as it should be whether you're printing 25 or 50Y/M targets.
Dave
Dave
I am not in the printing industry, but in the past I have paid for large scale documents which were to be printed to high accuracy standards.
What I can assure you is that the previously posted chart showing dimensions ( in inches )measured to five decimal places (one hundred-thousandths or for machinists, "Ten Millionths") is purely wishful thinking. Think about slicing a human hair into three or four hundred thin strips and you'll have an idea of what one hundred-thousandths is.
Or, if you're metric, think one micron. Most people can't see anything smaller than about 40 microns.
So I can't say anything about the actual size of the targets in question, but I guarantee they aren't anywhere near as accurate as the chart might suggest.
What I can assure you is that the previously posted chart showing dimensions ( in inches )measured to five decimal places (one hundred-thousandths or for machinists, "Ten Millionths") is purely wishful thinking. Think about slicing a human hair into three or four hundred thin strips and you'll have an idea of what one hundred-thousandths is.
Or, if you're metric, think one micron. Most people can't see anything smaller than about 40 microns.
So I can't say anything about the actual size of the targets in question, but I guarantee they aren't anywhere near as accurate as the chart might suggest.
One way at this would be to do the actual measurement. Perhaps a hi-resolution scanner coupled with software that facilitates linear measurement (in pixels, mm, etc).
One could scan and measure bulls and look for variance within cards, between cards of the same run, between runs of the same printer, different printers, etc.
One could scan and measure bulls and look for variance within cards, between cards of the same run, between runs of the same printer, different printers, etc.
michaelthomas
www.thomasrifles.com
Hi Guys....this is actually a subject that is very near and dear to me. It's also one which I have spent a tremendous amount of time analyzing.
The first question to be answered is that the scoring dimensions refer to the outside of the scoring ring.
Second, since there is no written standard by which we have been instructed to adhere on ring size tolerance of printed targets....the best bet is to get as close as possible. Under a 60x microscope, the latest batch of sanctioned targets are well within .001" of suggested size in diameter. That translates to less than .0005" radially....or 1/8 the thickness of sheet of plain printer paper.
I'm not looking to step on anybodies toes here, but measuring the target box and verifying its size only tells you that the target box is the right size. If we analyze the scoring rings by importance, it is instantly clear that the 10 ring is used for the overwhelming majority of scoring decisions. It determines X's, 10's, and 9's....and in a typical competition, these are pretty much all that matter. I've heard lots of arguments about how inaccurate manual scoring must be because there is no way to verify concentricity and diameter of the printed scoring rings...so therefore it cannot be trusted. If we think about this a little bit, its easy to see that the 10 ring is all we really need to worry about....and since it is the actual aim point it cannot be out of concentricity with itself. It can be too big or too small, of course...but lets examine that for a bit. Lets say that we shoot a National event, and the targets used for the event have a 10 ring that is .050" too big. Please bear in mind that this is a ridiculous exaggeration for the sake of making a point. Will this large 10 ring favor anyone in particular? No...of course not. It may, however, produce scores that are abnormally higher over the entire range of shooters....but it won't make the competition unfair in any way. Over samples of targets that I have measured from the same batch, I have not witnessed more than .0005" radial difference in the 10 ring. In any case, I would recommend that targets used for big events come from the same pack...and that would take care of any potential issue that could arise from 10 ring disparity.
The target box itself is actually supposed to be 50mm....which is 1.9685.
Scoring plugs should be .224 head diameter. The scoring plugs that are commercially available for sale are unsuitable for .177 caliber use...because the shank it too big and will open the hole up unnecessarily. Many of us have custom made .224 scoring plugs that were designed for use with .177 pellets and have a shank that is .180". It's big enough to insert solidly, but not too big to deform the hole that was made. I have replugged holes 25 times intentionally...to see if I came up with a different answer after replugging....and I do not. Its that simple.
The scoring plugs with the magnifier built in are essentially crap. They do not compare at all to a solid plug and external magnification. It takes only one time using a good plug and a magnifier box to see this difference.
Along with a proper scoring plug and a good target....you still need other tools to do the job right.
The proper tools begin with a new target backer to support the target and ensure that the holes made by the pellet are as perfect as they can be. A person can (and should) move subsequent targets around on the backer to utilize fresh, unshot, areas to get the most mileage out of each backer if they are not going to be replaced each time. Backers should be something like cardboard, signboard, etc....not wood, or anything that does not allow the pellet to pass through completely and easily.
I would have thought that this next item would have gone without saying....but unfortunately it needs to be said. Target stands should be stationary. It is completely unacceptable for a target to wave in the wind because the stand is too flimsy to prevent it from doing so.
For accurate comparison across the globe....outdoor targets should be 25m from the front of the bench to the target face....indoors should be 25 yards.
Okay...now you have a good target, clean holes, and a plug suited for the job. Now you need magnification, light, and something to keep the target flat and well supported when plugging....and the light should be preferably from the underside of the target for close calls. I have a desk lamp that can be turned upside down...the target holder is then placed on the shade of the overturned lamp to view the shot with a great deal of light from underneath. This light alone will make most close calls a no brainer. Add a 8x slide magnifier box to the equation, and now you have no excuse to make the wrong call. It should be noted that you should be viewing straight down the side of the plug...not viewing from a 45 degree angle, which I see a lot. The slide magnifier box makes this a lot easier.
The right tools for the job are imperative to do the job right....period.
Attached is an example of how easy a magnifier box and some light can make a decision on what many would describe as a close call. It's really not very close at all. Plug this all day long, and it will still be the same....just a plain 10, not an X.
Mike
The first question to be answered is that the scoring dimensions refer to the outside of the scoring ring.
Second, since there is no written standard by which we have been instructed to adhere on ring size tolerance of printed targets....the best bet is to get as close as possible. Under a 60x microscope, the latest batch of sanctioned targets are well within .001" of suggested size in diameter. That translates to less than .0005" radially....or 1/8 the thickness of sheet of plain printer paper.
I'm not looking to step on anybodies toes here, but measuring the target box and verifying its size only tells you that the target box is the right size. If we analyze the scoring rings by importance, it is instantly clear that the 10 ring is used for the overwhelming majority of scoring decisions. It determines X's, 10's, and 9's....and in a typical competition, these are pretty much all that matter. I've heard lots of arguments about how inaccurate manual scoring must be because there is no way to verify concentricity and diameter of the printed scoring rings...so therefore it cannot be trusted. If we think about this a little bit, its easy to see that the 10 ring is all we really need to worry about....and since it is the actual aim point it cannot be out of concentricity with itself. It can be too big or too small, of course...but lets examine that for a bit. Lets say that we shoot a National event, and the targets used for the event have a 10 ring that is .050" too big. Please bear in mind that this is a ridiculous exaggeration for the sake of making a point. Will this large 10 ring favor anyone in particular? No...of course not. It may, however, produce scores that are abnormally higher over the entire range of shooters....but it won't make the competition unfair in any way. Over samples of targets that I have measured from the same batch, I have not witnessed more than .0005" radial difference in the 10 ring. In any case, I would recommend that targets used for big events come from the same pack...and that would take care of any potential issue that could arise from 10 ring disparity.
The target box itself is actually supposed to be 50mm....which is 1.9685.
Scoring plugs should be .224 head diameter. The scoring plugs that are commercially available for sale are unsuitable for .177 caliber use...because the shank it too big and will open the hole up unnecessarily. Many of us have custom made .224 scoring plugs that were designed for use with .177 pellets and have a shank that is .180". It's big enough to insert solidly, but not too big to deform the hole that was made. I have replugged holes 25 times intentionally...to see if I came up with a different answer after replugging....and I do not. Its that simple.
The scoring plugs with the magnifier built in are essentially crap. They do not compare at all to a solid plug and external magnification. It takes only one time using a good plug and a magnifier box to see this difference.
Along with a proper scoring plug and a good target....you still need other tools to do the job right.
The proper tools begin with a new target backer to support the target and ensure that the holes made by the pellet are as perfect as they can be. A person can (and should) move subsequent targets around on the backer to utilize fresh, unshot, areas to get the most mileage out of each backer if they are not going to be replaced each time. Backers should be something like cardboard, signboard, etc....not wood, or anything that does not allow the pellet to pass through completely and easily.
I would have thought that this next item would have gone without saying....but unfortunately it needs to be said. Target stands should be stationary. It is completely unacceptable for a target to wave in the wind because the stand is too flimsy to prevent it from doing so.
For accurate comparison across the globe....outdoor targets should be 25m from the front of the bench to the target face....indoors should be 25 yards.
Okay...now you have a good target, clean holes, and a plug suited for the job. Now you need magnification, light, and something to keep the target flat and well supported when plugging....and the light should be preferably from the underside of the target for close calls. I have a desk lamp that can be turned upside down...the target holder is then placed on the shade of the overturned lamp to view the shot with a great deal of light from underneath. This light alone will make most close calls a no brainer. Add a 8x slide magnifier box to the equation, and now you have no excuse to make the wrong call. It should be noted that you should be viewing straight down the side of the plug...not viewing from a 45 degree angle, which I see a lot. The slide magnifier box makes this a lot easier.
The right tools for the job are imperative to do the job right....period.
Attached is an example of how easy a magnifier box and some light can make a decision on what many would describe as a close call. It's really not very close at all. Plug this all day long, and it will still be the same....just a plain 10, not an X.
Mike
Attachments
Last edited:
michaelthomas
www.thomasrifles.com
The WRABF does not list any tolerances for their target...which is what we use.
I believe that the targets were checked with electronic calipers under magnification to verify size.
Mike
I believe that the targets were checked with electronic calipers under magnification to verify size.
Mike
strever
Member
so we don't have tolerances ?
the person asking me is a benchrest shooter from the UK
and i'm guessing he was wondering if we are more meticulous and detailed then they are
wonder if this question has come up for world ?
obviously we are using a VERY good printer
now i don't know what answer to give him
other then our targets are VERY VERY accurate
the person asking me is a benchrest shooter from the UK
and i'm guessing he was wondering if we are more meticulous and detailed then they are
wonder if this question has come up for world ?
obviously we are using a VERY good printer
now i don't know what answer to give him
other then our targets are VERY VERY accurate
Joe Friedrich
Member
Dick,
The files that the Board acquired were from the World and European Organization. Years past there were corrupt files, also folks were allowed to reprint these targets from their own printer if available or have it done at there local print shop. Unfortunately the targets would differ in measurements. I've spent time with Bill, and Carl from the World Organizations getting it right and having them give us a uncorrupt file which was a problem both there and here. Carl worked his butt off to get the measurements right for the different organizations.
I went through three different printers in the area to find the one that would give the most accurate readings and best price that is passed on to the shooters.
Mike has it right, other tools are needed to accurately score targets. The Board is in the process to help and work with sanctioned club match directors to aid in the scoring process.
Regards,
Joe
The files that the Board acquired were from the World and European Organization. Years past there were corrupt files, also folks were allowed to reprint these targets from their own printer if available or have it done at there local print shop. Unfortunately the targets would differ in measurements. I've spent time with Bill, and Carl from the World Organizations getting it right and having them give us a uncorrupt file which was a problem both there and here. Carl worked his butt off to get the measurements right for the different organizations.
I went through three different printers in the area to find the one that would give the most accurate readings and best price that is passed on to the shooters.
Mike has it right, other tools are needed to accurately score targets. The Board is in the process to help and work with sanctioned club match directors to aid in the scoring process.
Regards,
Joe
I don't mean anything by this post but speak from considerable experience. The idea is simple but making it happen is difficult.
Choose a paper that you like and is readily available. By readily available I mean that slight differences in the paper won't matter much. That's not nearly as easy as folks think it is and is genuinely important. Try not to spare expense on the paper. Look at the paper prior to printing (each time) and don't just go with anything.
OK, you have the target "file". Work with the printer so you can be there when he's ready to start printing. Measure the first targets off the press to make sure they are right. Do this carefully and measure everything you can think to measure. Do this everytime you have targets printed. Make sure the printer understands what he's doing....the first target and the last target needs to be the same..exactly the same. Printers are used to printing things that don't require the accuracy involved here. Write down everything you can think to measure, as it's all important.
Print as many targets at once as you possibly can. This is too difficult a process to do over and over and the paper will change a bit. Things to think about are expense and storage.
If you do this everytime, targets will be cheaper in the long run. There's nothing like having 50,000 targets printed and have to give them away for practice. Alternatively, you will have something to give away!!
Choose a paper that you like and is readily available. By readily available I mean that slight differences in the paper won't matter much. That's not nearly as easy as folks think it is and is genuinely important. Try not to spare expense on the paper. Look at the paper prior to printing (each time) and don't just go with anything.
OK, you have the target "file". Work with the printer so you can be there when he's ready to start printing. Measure the first targets off the press to make sure they are right. Do this carefully and measure everything you can think to measure. Do this everytime you have targets printed. Make sure the printer understands what he's doing....the first target and the last target needs to be the same..exactly the same. Printers are used to printing things that don't require the accuracy involved here. Write down everything you can think to measure, as it's all important.
Print as many targets at once as you possibly can. This is too difficult a process to do over and over and the paper will change a bit. Things to think about are expense and storage.
If you do this everytime, targets will be cheaper in the long run. There's nothing like having 50,000 targets printed and have to give them away for practice. Alternatively, you will have something to give away!!