I would like to ask all of you Rapid fire shooters why is the ISSF leaning toward this change? Is it because they want more competitors into the sport? If so, why don't they just have another class of ORF with .22LR?
Or, is it because the this sport is getting too easy? If this is the case, why can't they just reduce the size of the target and also use the 10 X ring as well?
I am not too happy about this proposed rule change. It makes my gun obsolete and it will make me a criminal unless I convert them. Our gun Control laws in Canada exempt the OSP because of its competition status but no longer in 2005.
If the ISSF does go ahead, are we happy with this and just going to sit back and let it happen? Is something being done about it already? I will write to the ISSF to protest for the above reasons.
Will it make a difference if we all write in?
If it does go through, will North America continue its own ORF .22 short competition and call it a World Championship once a year?
Any comments or thoughts would be appreciated.
Thank you
Claudio Incrocci
incrocci-at-shaw.ca.45888.0
To All Olympic Rapid Fire Shooters RE: .22LR Rule change
Moderators: rexifelis, pilkguns
-
Mark
Re: To All Olympic Rapid Fire Shooters RE: .22LR Rule change
My guess is, the change was for two reasons; get more people into the sport AND make things a little tougher. I'm kind of glad about the change. .22 short is expensive. Plus, instead of having to have an OSP and a Pardini SP, I can just have the Pardini. With it, I'm able to compete in RF, Standard Pistol, and Bullseye. For those stuck with a .22 short, you can try to convert it to .22lr (I think most RF guns are based on another .22lr model anyhow), or IIRC, it's still legal for NRA bullseye competition if you change the grip. Had it not been for this change, I probably would not have started shooting Rapid Fire.
: I would like to ask all of you Rapid fire shooters why is the ISSF leaning toward this change? Is it because they want more competitors into the sport? If so, why don't they just have another class of ORF with .22LR?
: Or, is it because the this sport is getting too easy? If this is the case, why can't they just reduce the size of the target and also use the 10 X ring as well?
: I am not too happy about this proposed rule change. It makes my gun obsolete and it will make me a criminal unless I convert them. Our gun Control laws in Canada exempt the OSP because of its competition status but no longer in 2005.
: If the ISSF does go ahead, are we happy with this and just going to sit back and let it happen? Is something being done about it already? I will write to the ISSF to protest for the above reasons.
: Will it make a difference if we all write in?
: If it does go through, will North America continue its own ORF .22 short competition and call it a World Championship once a year?
: Any comments or thoughts would be appreciated.
: Thank you
: Claudio Incrocci
.45889.45888
: I would like to ask all of you Rapid fire shooters why is the ISSF leaning toward this change? Is it because they want more competitors into the sport? If so, why don't they just have another class of ORF with .22LR?
: Or, is it because the this sport is getting too easy? If this is the case, why can't they just reduce the size of the target and also use the 10 X ring as well?
: I am not too happy about this proposed rule change. It makes my gun obsolete and it will make me a criminal unless I convert them. Our gun Control laws in Canada exempt the OSP because of its competition status but no longer in 2005.
: If the ISSF does go ahead, are we happy with this and just going to sit back and let it happen? Is something being done about it already? I will write to the ISSF to protest for the above reasons.
: Will it make a difference if we all write in?
: If it does go through, will North America continue its own ORF .22 short competition and call it a World Championship once a year?
: Any comments or thoughts would be appreciated.
: Thank you
: Claudio Incrocci
.45889.45888
-
Richard
Re: To All Olympic Rapid Fire Shooters RE: .22LR Rule change
why don't they just have another class of ORF with .22LR?
With the small number of Rapid Fire shooters in the US it's unlikely that there would be sufficient interest to have parallel events.
: Or, is it because the this sport is getting too easy?
Not Likely. The changes, in theory, will make it easier to get in since the shooter won't need a separate (expensive) gun that isn't used ifte.
If this is the case, why can't they just reduce the size of the target and also use the 10 X ring as well?
Actually, the target will be the Standard Pistol target.
: If the ISSF does go ahead, are we happy with this and just going to sit back and let it happen?
Yes, most likely.
: Will it make a difference if we all write in?
Not likely.
: If it does go through, will North America continue its own ORF .22 short competition and call it a World Championship once a year?
Again, not likely. USAS main mission is grooming the Olympic team. Starting a separate, non-Olympic event doesn't seem a useful expenditure of scarce funds.
govtmodel-at-budweiser.com.45901.45888
With the small number of Rapid Fire shooters in the US it's unlikely that there would be sufficient interest to have parallel events.
: Or, is it because the this sport is getting too easy?
Not Likely. The changes, in theory, will make it easier to get in since the shooter won't need a separate (expensive) gun that isn't used ifte.
If this is the case, why can't they just reduce the size of the target and also use the 10 X ring as well?
Actually, the target will be the Standard Pistol target.
: If the ISSF does go ahead, are we happy with this and just going to sit back and let it happen?
Yes, most likely.
: Will it make a difference if we all write in?
Not likely.
: If it does go through, will North America continue its own ORF .22 short competition and call it a World Championship once a year?
Again, not likely. USAS main mission is grooming the Olympic team. Starting a separate, non-Olympic event doesn't seem a useful expenditure of scarce funds.
govtmodel-at-budweiser.com.45901.45888
-
fred
Will someone please explain??
In the San Francisco Bay Area, there are a number of RF pistols, but no functioning targets on which to practise. When we do have a rare RF match, we use NRA TF/RF turning targets (which, of course, have incorrect spacing for ISSF RF). At our matches, shooters often participate using Std. pistols, and are competitive at our fairly low level.
It seems to me that this situation might be duplicated in many parts of the US. In other words, it's not the type of gun that is the limiting factor, it's the target system. The change in gun specifications scheduled for 2005 will not have the slightest positive effect on RF match frequency or participation in our area.
If some kind of change had been made to the target specifications, so that targeting systems would be simpler and/or cheaper, we would be able to run more RF matches and have greater participation. With the foregoing in mind, will someone please explain why the guns were altered and not the target systems?
: I would like to ask all of you Rapid fire shooters why is the ISSF leaning toward this change? Is it because they want more competitors into the sport? If so, why don't they just have another class of ORF with .22LR?
: Or, is it because the this sport is getting too easy? If this is the case, why can't they just reduce the size of the target and also use the 10 X ring as well?
: I am not too happy about this proposed rule change. It makes my gun obsolete and it will make me a criminal unless I convert them. Our gun Control laws in Canada exempt the OSP because of its competition status but no longer in 2005.
: If the ISSF does go ahead, are we happy with this and just going to sit back and let it happen? Is something being done about it already? I will write to the ISSF to protest for the above reasons.
: Will it make a difference if we all write in?
: If it does go through, will North America continue its own ORF .22 short competition and call it a World Championship once a year?
: Any comments or thoughts would be appreciated.
: Thank you
: Claudio Incrocci
frbauer-at-msn.com.45908.45888
It seems to me that this situation might be duplicated in many parts of the US. In other words, it's not the type of gun that is the limiting factor, it's the target system. The change in gun specifications scheduled for 2005 will not have the slightest positive effect on RF match frequency or participation in our area.
If some kind of change had been made to the target specifications, so that targeting systems would be simpler and/or cheaper, we would be able to run more RF matches and have greater participation. With the foregoing in mind, will someone please explain why the guns were altered and not the target systems?
: I would like to ask all of you Rapid fire shooters why is the ISSF leaning toward this change? Is it because they want more competitors into the sport? If so, why don't they just have another class of ORF with .22LR?
: Or, is it because the this sport is getting too easy? If this is the case, why can't they just reduce the size of the target and also use the 10 X ring as well?
: I am not too happy about this proposed rule change. It makes my gun obsolete and it will make me a criminal unless I convert them. Our gun Control laws in Canada exempt the OSP because of its competition status but no longer in 2005.
: If the ISSF does go ahead, are we happy with this and just going to sit back and let it happen? Is something being done about it already? I will write to the ISSF to protest for the above reasons.
: Will it make a difference if we all write in?
: If it does go through, will North America continue its own ORF .22 short competition and call it a World Championship once a year?
: Any comments or thoughts would be appreciated.
: Thank you
: Claudio Incrocci
frbauer-at-msn.com.45908.45888
-
David Levene
Re: To All Olympic Rapid Fire Shooters RE: .22LR Rule change
: Actually, the target will be the Standard Pistol target.
I am afraid you are wrong.
The target will have the same size black as the Standard Pistol target but the scoring rings will be the same size as the existing Rapid Fire target.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.45912.45901
I am afraid you are wrong.
The target will have the same size black as the Standard Pistol target but the scoring rings will be the same size as the existing Rapid Fire target.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.45912.45901
-
David Levene
Re: Will someone please explain??
: If some kind of change had been made to the target specifications, so that targeting systems would be simpler and/or cheaper, we would be able to run more RF matches and have greater participation. With the foregoing in mind, will someone please explain why the guns were altered and not the target systems?
Because in more parts of the world the standard targetry at 25m has ISSF spacing.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.45914.45908
Because in more parts of the world the standard targetry at 25m has ISSF spacing.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.45914.45908
-
PETE
Good Point
I think you are correct that the problem is with the target systems, and the problem of setting up a series of them so any shooters can shoot at once, and the very slow process of scoring that limits the sport.
My impression is that the thinking was that the target system is a basic part of the sport, e.i. having to move to another target for each shot. The thinking was that the preceived need for another pistol was the limitation.
: In the San Francisco Bay Area, there are a number of RF pistols, but no functioning targets on which to practise. When we do have a rare RF match, we use NRA TF/RF turning targets (which, of course, have incorrect spacing for ISSF RF). At our matches, shooters often participate using Std. pistols, and are competitive at our fairly low level.
: It seems to me that this situation might be duplicated in many parts of the US. In other words, it's not the type of gun that is the limiting factor, it's the target system. The change in gun specifications scheduled for 2005 will not have the slightest positive effect on RF match frequency or participation in our area.
: If some kind of change had been made to the target specifications, so that targeting systems would be simpler and/or cheaper, we would be able to run more RF matches and have greater participation. With the foregoing in mind, will someone please explain why the guns were altered and not the target systems?
: : I would like to ask all of you Rapid fire shooters why is the ISSF leaning toward this change? Is it because they want more competitors into the sport? If so, why don't they just have another class of ORF with .22LR?
: : Or, is it because the this sport is getting too easy? If this is the case, why can't they just reduce the size of the target and also use the 10 X ring as well?
: : I am not too happy about this proposed rule change. It makes my gun obsolete and it will make me a criminal unless I convert them. Our gun Control laws in Canada exempt the OSP because of its competition status but no longer in 2005.
: : If the ISSF does go ahead, are we happy with this and just going to sit back and let it happen? Is something being done about it already? I will write to the ISSF to protest for the above reasons.
: : Will it make a difference if we all write in?
: : If it does go through, will North America continue its own ORF .22 short competition and call it a World Championship once a year?
: : Any comments or thoughts would be appreciated.
: : Thank you
: : Claudio Incrocci
.45915.45908
My impression is that the thinking was that the target system is a basic part of the sport, e.i. having to move to another target for each shot. The thinking was that the preceived need for another pistol was the limitation.
: In the San Francisco Bay Area, there are a number of RF pistols, but no functioning targets on which to practise. When we do have a rare RF match, we use NRA TF/RF turning targets (which, of course, have incorrect spacing for ISSF RF). At our matches, shooters often participate using Std. pistols, and are competitive at our fairly low level.
: It seems to me that this situation might be duplicated in many parts of the US. In other words, it's not the type of gun that is the limiting factor, it's the target system. The change in gun specifications scheduled for 2005 will not have the slightest positive effect on RF match frequency or participation in our area.
: If some kind of change had been made to the target specifications, so that targeting systems would be simpler and/or cheaper, we would be able to run more RF matches and have greater participation. With the foregoing in mind, will someone please explain why the guns were altered and not the target systems?
: : I would like to ask all of you Rapid fire shooters why is the ISSF leaning toward this change? Is it because they want more competitors into the sport? If so, why don't they just have another class of ORF with .22LR?
: : Or, is it because the this sport is getting too easy? If this is the case, why can't they just reduce the size of the target and also use the 10 X ring as well?
: : I am not too happy about this proposed rule change. It makes my gun obsolete and it will make me a criminal unless I convert them. Our gun Control laws in Canada exempt the OSP because of its competition status but no longer in 2005.
: : If the ISSF does go ahead, are we happy with this and just going to sit back and let it happen? Is something being done about it already? I will write to the ISSF to protest for the above reasons.
: : Will it make a difference if we all write in?
: : If it does go through, will North America continue its own ORF .22 short competition and call it a World Championship once a year?
: : Any comments or thoughts would be appreciated.
: : Thank you
: : Claudio Incrocci
.45915.45908
-
Richard
Re: To All Olympic Rapid Fire Shooters RE: .22LR Rule change
: I am afraid you are wrong.
: The target will have the same size black as the Standard Pistol target but the scoring rings will be the same size as the existing Rapid Fire target.
Shows how much I know:-)
govtmodel-at-budweiser.com.45917.45912
: The target will have the same size black as the Standard Pistol target but the scoring rings will be the same size as the existing Rapid Fire target.
Shows how much I know:-)
govtmodel-at-budweiser.com.45917.45912
-
David Levene
Re: To All Olympic Rapid Fire Shooters RE: .22LR Rule change
: : I am afraid you are wrong.
: : The target will have the same size black as the Standard Pistol target but the scoring rings will be the same size as the existing Rapid Fire target.
: Shows how much I know:-)
Shows how little they have advertised it.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.45918.45917
: : The target will have the same size black as the Standard Pistol target but the scoring rings will be the same size as the existing Rapid Fire target.
: Shows how much I know:-)
Shows how little they have advertised it.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.45918.45917
-
Mark
How to shoot Rapid Fire cheaply
Don't bother with turning targets. Set up five stationary targets at the proper distance and spacing. Get an audible shot timer. For each string, set the appropriate start and stop beeps. Among other companies, Pact makes a really good one, that can even function as a chronograph. This shouldn't cost you more than $150 for a timer (and maybe a LOT less depending on how basic a timer you buy).
In the alternative, you can rig up a timed lights system...the coach at UT-Austin has done this. It looks pretty cheap to do too, if you're a little handy with electronic stuff.
.45921.45888
In the alternative, you can rig up a timed lights system...the coach at UT-Austin has done this. It looks pretty cheap to do too, if you're a little handy with electronic stuff.
.45921.45888
-
Claudio
Re: Will someone please explain?? Will This Work?
>>>>>>>>>>>>When we do have a rare RF match, we use NRA TF/RF turning targets (which, of course, have incorrect spacing for ISSF RF).>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You have some good points about ORF in North America, especially the target system. Would it be easy to use an adapter or modification to get the correct spacing, so that the NRA Target System can be used with reduced 25 yard ORF targets? How far out are they from each other, is the spacing close enough between NRA and ORF to allow for such a modification in order to shoot both on same system?
I will ask my friend after I post this, he has made turning target systems for Rapid fire and see if it is feasible. I will post the answer, if anyone else already knows, please let us know.
Looks like I will have to add a new barrel to both of my OSP guns to make it legal for 2005, just to keep them. I do like the idea that we get new rapid fire shooters into the sport with 22LR but we will have to work on the target system.
incrocci-at-shaw.ca.45923.45908
You have some good points about ORF in North America, especially the target system. Would it be easy to use an adapter or modification to get the correct spacing, so that the NRA Target System can be used with reduced 25 yard ORF targets? How far out are they from each other, is the spacing close enough between NRA and ORF to allow for such a modification in order to shoot both on same system?
I will ask my friend after I post this, he has made turning target systems for Rapid fire and see if it is feasible. I will post the answer, if anyone else already knows, please let us know.
Looks like I will have to add a new barrel to both of my OSP guns to make it legal for 2005, just to keep them. I do like the idea that we get new rapid fire shooters into the sport with 22LR but we will have to work on the target system.
incrocci-at-shaw.ca.45923.45908
-
JLK
Correct me if I'm wrong...
but it's my understanding that the turning target system is no longer used for International Rapid Fire. A red light, green light is used. If this is the case you could darn near hang the targets on a clothes line!
.45925.45888
.45925.45888
-
fred
Re: Will someone please explain??
: : If some kind of change had been made to the target specifications, so that targeting systems would be simpler and/or cheaper, we would be able to run more RF matches and have greater participation. With the foregoing in mind, will someone please explain why the guns were altered and not the target systems?
: Because in more parts of the world the standard targetry at 25m has ISSF spacing.
Perhaps my question was not clear. It's not the spacing that's at issue, it's the complexity and expense of the whole target system. I only mentioned that we use NRA targets to show that, in an area which contains a good number of RF guns, there are no proper targets. In other words, the shooters are willing to buy the guns, but the clubs cannot afford the targets. I do not believe that changing the gun requirement to Std. pistol will significantly increase the number of RF shooters, because it is already permitted under current rules to use Std. pistol if one wishes.
frbauer-at-msn.com.45927.45914
: Because in more parts of the world the standard targetry at 25m has ISSF spacing.
Perhaps my question was not clear. It's not the spacing that's at issue, it's the complexity and expense of the whole target system. I only mentioned that we use NRA targets to show that, in an area which contains a good number of RF guns, there are no proper targets. In other words, the shooters are willing to buy the guns, but the clubs cannot afford the targets. I do not believe that changing the gun requirement to Std. pistol will significantly increase the number of RF shooters, because it is already permitted under current rules to use Std. pistol if one wishes.
frbauer-at-msn.com.45927.45914
-
Mark
Re: Will someone please explain??
I must be confused. Since when did target prices get astronomical? Just get a pack of 100, and if necessary, buy some pasters and you're good to go.
Buy yourself a shot timer for $120 or so, or rig up a timed green/red light system for the same amount of money (or less) and voila! You're in business.
People seem to make it sound like differential equations or something.
: Perhaps my question was not clear. It's not the spacing that's at issue, it's the complexity and expense of the whole target system. I only mentioned that we use NRA targets to show that, in an area which contains a good number of RF guns, there are no proper targets. In other words, the shooters are willing to buy the guns, but the clubs cannot afford the targets. I do not believe that changing the gun requirement to Std. pistol will significantly increase the number of RF shooters, because it is already permitted under current rules to use Std. pistol if one wishes.
.45928.45927
Buy yourself a shot timer for $120 or so, or rig up a timed green/red light system for the same amount of money (or less) and voila! You're in business.
People seem to make it sound like differential equations or something.
: Perhaps my question was not clear. It's not the spacing that's at issue, it's the complexity and expense of the whole target system. I only mentioned that we use NRA targets to show that, in an area which contains a good number of RF guns, there are no proper targets. In other words, the shooters are willing to buy the guns, but the clubs cannot afford the targets. I do not believe that changing the gun requirement to Std. pistol will significantly increase the number of RF shooters, because it is already permitted under current rules to use Std. pistol if one wishes.
.45928.45927
-
Claudio
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong...
I have heard that they have been using the light system but you need to get late shot detectors for each position. Late shot detection for each position might be expensive especially for standard and centerfire pistol (too many positions).
Anyone know of a cost effect and working late shot detector for each position? Do they actually use the lighting system for rapid fire too?
incrocci-at-shaw.ca.45929.45925
Anyone know of a cost effect and working late shot detector for each position? Do they actually use the lighting system for rapid fire too?
incrocci-at-shaw.ca.45929.45925
-
Jack
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong...
How about adapting a timer like the spray and pray guys use in action shooting. It would activate with the green light, record the shot reports, and show the elapsed time.
: I have heard that they have been using the light system but you need to get late shot detectors for each position. Late shot detection for each position might be expensive especially for standard and centerfire pistol (too many positions).
: Anyone know of a cost effect and working late shot detector for each position? Do they actually use the lighting system for rapid fire too?
.45936.45929
: I have heard that they have been using the light system but you need to get late shot detectors for each position. Late shot detection for each position might be expensive especially for standard and centerfire pistol (too many positions).
: Anyone know of a cost effect and working late shot detector for each position? Do they actually use the lighting system for rapid fire too?
.45936.45929
-
David Levene
Re: Will someone please explain??
: Perhaps my question was not clear. It's not the spacing that's at issue, it's the complexity and expense of the whole target system. I only mentioned that we use NRA targets to show that, in an area which contains a good number of RF guns, there are no proper targets. In other words, the shooters are willing to buy the guns, but the clubs cannot afford the targets. I do not believe that changing the gun requirement to Std. pistol will significantly increase the number of RF shooters, because it is already permitted under current rules to use Std. pistol if one wishes.
Like you I am not sure that a change to Standard Pistols will have the desired effect, at least not immediately.
Yes, you have been allowed to use Standard Pistols up to now but how discouraging is it to know that you have no real chance of winning (for the average shooter). It will take some time but hopefully shooters will be able to try the event and not be too embarrassed by the results.
In my opinion they should have removed RF from the Olympic programme years ago and replaced it by Standard Pistol. To shoot either event well takes the vast time, effort and dedication that we demand from our Olympians.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.45937.45927
Like you I am not sure that a change to Standard Pistols will have the desired effect, at least not immediately.
Yes, you have been allowed to use Standard Pistols up to now but how discouraging is it to know that you have no real chance of winning (for the average shooter). It will take some time but hopefully shooters will be able to try the event and not be too embarrassed by the results.
In my opinion they should have removed RF from the Olympic programme years ago and replaced it by Standard Pistol. To shoot either event well takes the vast time, effort and dedication that we demand from our Olympians.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.45937.45927
-
David Levene
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong...
: but it's my understanding that the turning target system is no longer used for International Rapid Fire. A red light, green light is used. If this is the case you could darn near hang the targets on a clothes line!
The use of electronic targets is much more widespread than it used to be, and almost total at World Cup level and above. It is not justa case of using a few lights though. They are linked to electronic scoring and shot detection. The target frames themselves are quite heavy, and expensive, pieces of equipment.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.45938.45925
The use of electronic targets is much more widespread than it used to be, and almost total at World Cup level and above. It is not justa case of using a few lights though. They are linked to electronic scoring and shot detection. The target frames themselves are quite heavy, and expensive, pieces of equipment.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.45938.45925
-
JLK
I don't see the need for heavy frames...
Why would you need them?
It's not the timer that is expensive, it's the turning mechanisms. As far as electronic scoring again, why? At the club level manual scoring is probably what's done now and as far as late shot detection...Well, that is handled at scores of indoor ranges throughout the country by the honor system. If you really WANT to shoot rapid fire, it seems to me things have gotten a lot easier for the local shooter to be able to do so.
.45947.45938
It's not the timer that is expensive, it's the turning mechanisms. As far as electronic scoring again, why? At the club level manual scoring is probably what's done now and as far as late shot detection...Well, that is handled at scores of indoor ranges throughout the country by the honor system. If you really WANT to shoot rapid fire, it seems to me things have gotten a lot easier for the local shooter to be able to do so.
.45947.45938
-
David Levene
Re: I don't see the need for heavy frames...
If people really want to shoot rapid then they will always find a way to do it. I can see no reason why local "friendly" type matches should not be shot as you suggest. It may not be strictly in accordance with ISSF rules but who cares, it is ISSF "style".
: Why would you need them?
: It's not the timer that is expensive, it's the turning mechanisms. As far as electronic scoring again, why? At the club level manual scoring is probably what's done now and as far as late shot detection...Well, that is handled at scores of indoor ranges throughout the country by the honor system. If you really WANT to shoot rapid fire, it seems to me things have gotten a lot easier for the local shooter to be able to do so.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.45954.45947
: Why would you need them?
: It's not the timer that is expensive, it's the turning mechanisms. As far as electronic scoring again, why? At the club level manual scoring is probably what's done now and as far as late shot detection...Well, that is handled at scores of indoor ranges throughout the country by the honor system. If you really WANT to shoot rapid fire, it seems to me things have gotten a lot easier for the local shooter to be able to do so.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.45954.45947