Page 1 of 1
NRA 25yd slow fiire target size mismatch
Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 1:42 pm
by bigaaron
I have 2 different B-16 NRA 25 yard slow fire targets with different scoring ring sizes. One has the same dimensions that the NRA rule book list as follows x ring- .67 in,10ring-1.51in, 9rg 2.60in, 8rg 3.82in, 7rg 5.32. The other target does not have an x ring but it measures out to as followed- 10 ring 1.68 in 9rg-2.73, 8rg-3.98, 7rg-5.48in. Both targets have the 5 and 6 ring but I did not measure them. They both have the eagle seal the say official competition. and are made by U.S. Target Why the two different sizies Thank Aaron.
Target Difference
Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 3:24 pm
by fc60
Greetings,
A few years ago the NRA added the X-Ring to the 25 yard Slow Fire targets making the ones with no X-Ring obsolete.
Cheers,
Dave
Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 3:51 pm
by bigaaron
Did they make the scoring rings smaller also? Thank
Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 10:23 pm
by Greg Derr
Yes, the old one was incorrect.
Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 12:20 am
by bigaaron
Well that explains that. I had call US target before I posted the question but all I got was an answering machine, then I called another target company in Colorado and they didn't have an answer. I knew I'd find the answer here, Thanks Guys Aaron Happy New year
Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 12:27 pm
by Isabel1130
Interesting Greg. When did they make the change, and did they have to put an asterisk on records set for the short course on the old slow fire targets?
New B16 Target
Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 12:47 pm
by GOVTMODEL
Isabel1130 wrote:Interesting Greg. When did they make the change, and did they have to put an asterisk on records set for the short course on the old slow fire targets?
It was about 1998, and the old records appear to have been retired.
Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 3:26 pm
by David N
..
Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 9:12 pm
by bigaaron
Dave n wrote:
Having the targets to conform to mathematics for the second decimal for ring sizes would be too "scientific" and "elitist", so it seems. By tweaking the sizes (unnoticeably for the eye when comparing targets side-by-side), the targets are created...
I was reading you comment about not conforming to mathematics, Part of that could be the way I measure the rings, I just laying the caliper on the paper and measuring the outer most part of the ring and depending how I look at it can come up with differnent second decimel point readings. And you are right the differerence in targets really isnt that noticable until you put the caliper to it, It thought it was night and day looking at the targets side be side but it is the lack of the x ring that seem to make it stand out Thanks Aaron
Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 12:39 am
by David N
..
Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 11:30 am
by bigaaron
No problem David, I appreciate you and others taking the time to answer my question. It's always harder(for me anyway) to put on paper your thoughts as apposed to talking to someone face to face. Plus the math part is over my head, All I know is they are different (smile)
Thanks Again Aaron
problem
Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 4:48 pm
by FredB
David N wrote that he "know(s) nothing about NRA shooting", so maybe he's not aware that conventional Bullseye is shot using 3 different caliber guns (.22, CF .32-.45, and .45) on the same targets. That makes it hard to scale down targets and keep the same degree of difficulty for all the different calibers. It's not a question of simple mathematics. So IMHO it's a real stretch to make assumptions about alleged fears of "science" and "elitism" in talking about the people who have to "create" these targets.
FredB