No - and that's a good thing. Otherwise you'd run into all manner of hassles from the pragmatic (keeping the list up to date in a timely manner would take manhours that they would have to pay for) to the nefarious (if ISSF say who you can buy from, there's a massive potential for bribes and so on).beats wrote:Do the ISSF not put together a list of the jackets that they have approved?
Shooting jackets - the newer composite materials
Moderators: pilkguns, Marcus, m1963, David Levene, Spencer
Guys
If the ISSF has shelved plans to reduce the supportive element of the equipment over fears of injury, spinal, etc, then they are surely dispaying a heavy dose of hipocracy over their own rules?
It's either orthapedic support or its not, which by its very nature must support otherwise its useless? Surely if it has any orthapedic value then it will breach the following rules which prohibit any such support? If it does'nt breach the rules it will not have any orthapedic support value?
Rule 6.4.2.1.1.
The use of any special device, means, or garment which imobilise or unduly reduce the movement of the shooters legs, body or arms is prohibited...... etc.
Rule 7.4.7.3.
All straps, laces, bindings, seams, stiching or devices which may be construed as artificial support are prohibited.
Catch 22!
Best regards
Robin
If the ISSF has shelved plans to reduce the supportive element of the equipment over fears of injury, spinal, etc, then they are surely dispaying a heavy dose of hipocracy over their own rules?
It's either orthapedic support or its not, which by its very nature must support otherwise its useless? Surely if it has any orthapedic value then it will breach the following rules which prohibit any such support? If it does'nt breach the rules it will not have any orthapedic support value?
Rule 6.4.2.1.1.
The use of any special device, means, or garment which imobilise or unduly reduce the movement of the shooters legs, body or arms is prohibited...... etc.
Rule 7.4.7.3.
All straps, laces, bindings, seams, stiching or devices which may be construed as artificial support are prohibited.
Catch 22!
Best regards
Robin
Robin,RobinC wrote:Guys
<snip>
Surely if it has any orthapedic value then it will breach the following rules which prohibit any such support? If it does'nt breach the rules it will not have any orthapedic support value?
Rule 6.4.2.1.1.
The use of any special device, means, or garment which imobilise or unduly reduce the movement of the shooters legs, body or arms is prohibited...... etc.
Rule 7.4.7.3.
All straps, laces, bindings, seams, stiching or devices which may be construed as artificial support are prohibited.
Catch 22!
Best regards
Robin
Not at all, the key word is 'unduly' since they obviously do not immobilise. The ISSF do not consider shooting clothing unduely restricts movement.
your second point refers to specific bits of fabric reinforcement - which are prohibited if they are extra 'artificial support'.
Rob.
Not at all, the key words are "imobilise or unduly reduce movement", and for any orthapedic advantage it must both reduce movement and support which contravenes both rules.
My point is if it conforms to ISSF rules it will not have any significant orthapedic advantage, if it does it must infringe the rules.
You are allowed to wear normal underwear though, does that include a corset or basque if that's your thing!
Best regards
Robin
My point is if it conforms to ISSF rules it will not have any significant orthapedic advantage, if it does it must infringe the rules.
You are allowed to wear normal underwear though, does that include a corset or basque if that's your thing!
Best regards
Robin
No, read what you've written. Reducing movement is fine - 'unduly' reducing movement isn't. Anyway - ask your equipment control officers at the next ISSF match you shoot, they'll give you a more considered answer.RobinC wrote:Not at all, the key words are "imobilise or unduly reduce movement", and for any orthapedic advantage it must both reduce movement and support which contravenes both rules.
My point is if it conforms to ISSF rules it will not have any significant orthapedic advantage, if it does it must infringe the rules.
You are allowed to wear normal underwear though, does that include a corset or basque if that's your thing!
Best regards
Robin
Rob.
Indeed, but show me any thread that doesn't drift - at least we are still talking about the same subject :)JSBmatch wrote:Hey guys
We have drifted off topic slightly, the original post was asking about the new 'composite' synthetic materials now being used on some high end jackets and pants.
JSB
Rob.
Astronomical? They're not that much more expensive than made-to-measure canvas, and the off-the-rack ones (Mannel do an off-the-rack model) are about the same. You might pay an extra 5-10% from what I've seen so far. And talking with Stirton and Gonci and a few others confirmed that they seem to be holding up a lot better than canvas so far, and looking at the AHG fusion jacket, it's nicely stiff in two dimensions (along the plane of the fabric) but not very stiff at all in the third (normal to the plane of the fabric), so it can pass equipment control and provide excellent support in position. Plus, they don't change stiffness with temperature the way canvas does. And since they're not cotton, you can clean them a bit better.JSBmatch wrote:Sparks
Getting back to the new composite/synthetic jackets and pants, they have astronomical price tags, so are they any better than canvas for the money?
JSB
After a lot of bothering other shooters, I finally decided on a Kustermann Subratex on Gonci's recommendation.
So now I just have to buy the thing, and I'll report back after shooting it in a bit...
Roy
I don't think we are unduly drifting off the thread , some one said earlier that the reason the ISSF will not tighten up the regs and reduce the stiffness or even remove shooting trousers from the standing position was for medical reasons due to the risk of injury.
Roy, I do not disagree with you over wether current suits meet the rules I stated, you have missed my point, what I disagree with is that current suits can provide any significant medical orthapedic support and still meet those rules. I have some knowledge of such supports and believe me they do unduly reduce movement and do provide artificial support. That was the catch 22.
I think we have agravated the others enough so I'll have no further comment on this.
Good shooting, Best regards
Robin
I don't think we are unduly drifting off the thread , some one said earlier that the reason the ISSF will not tighten up the regs and reduce the stiffness or even remove shooting trousers from the standing position was for medical reasons due to the risk of injury.
Roy, I do not disagree with you over wether current suits meet the rules I stated, you have missed my point, what I disagree with is that current suits can provide any significant medical orthapedic support and still meet those rules. I have some knowledge of such supports and believe me they do unduly reduce movement and do provide artificial support. That was the catch 22.
I think we have agravated the others enough so I'll have no further comment on this.
Good shooting, Best regards
Robin
Robin
Just one more point re the medical. I don't use shooting trousers so to protect my lower back and hips i use a weight lifters body belt. Probably against the rules but i don't care as most of the shoots i attend are not ISSF regs. Actually, i would like to use it at an ISSF run shoot and then see what they say. I would love the 'face off' being the rebel i am.
Sparks,
OK, the price is not much different from a MtM canvas, but shooting clothing in general is very expensive and not every one can afford it. Prices in general have put people off taking up the sport. I'm sure there are some 'star' shooters out there but cannot afford to do it on costs. We must not get complacent with this just because we can afford it. I'm afraid to say that on costs alone, this sport has become a minority sport that has priced its self into the elitists bracket which is a shame.
Regards
JSB
Just one more point re the medical. I don't use shooting trousers so to protect my lower back and hips i use a weight lifters body belt. Probably against the rules but i don't care as most of the shoots i attend are not ISSF regs. Actually, i would like to use it at an ISSF run shoot and then see what they say. I would love the 'face off' being the rebel i am.
Sparks,
OK, the price is not much different from a MtM canvas, but shooting clothing in general is very expensive and not every one can afford it. Prices in general have put people off taking up the sport. I'm sure there are some 'star' shooters out there but cannot afford to do it on costs. We must not get complacent with this just because we can afford it. I'm afraid to say that on costs alone, this sport has become a minority sport that has priced its self into the elitists bracket which is a shame.
Regards
JSB
We'd probably have to send it back. That doesn't happen as often as you'd imagine though. I wouldn't mind finding a local tailor, but it's a profession that's been in serious decline over here even for normal clothing, let alone shooting jackets.beats wrote:You gonna have to send it back again for any unexpected tailoring or is there someone local that can do it?
True - on the other hand, the kit lasts for years (my last MtM jacket lasted eight years) and it's hardly true that entry cost is the sole criteria for elitism. Not to mention that MtM jackets are pretty much the top of the heap in terms of how expensive kit is (other than the rifle). If you buy off-the-rack, it's much cheaper; and if you buy second-hand, it's cheaper still.JSBmatch wrote:Sparks,
OK, the price is not much different from a MtM canvas, but shooting clothing in general is very expensive and not every one can afford it. Prices in general have put people off taking up the sport. I'm sure there are some 'star' shooters out there but cannot afford to do it on costs. We must not get complacent with this just because we can afford it. I'm afraid to say that on costs alone, this sport has become a minority sport that has priced its self into the elitists bracket which is a shame.
I mean, looking at an MtM jacket and saying that that's proof the sport is priced into elitism is like looking at a Ferrari and saying that its price is why driving is an elitist activity...
From reading the catalog, everywhere that looks like white canvas in that image is the subratex material. I guess the feel is a subjective thing - I thought the synthetic stuff in the AHG fusion jacket was pretty nice myself, and given how grotty my canvas jacket's gotten in the last eight years, I don't have any particular love for the material :DJason wrote:I've handled a Hitex jacket and didn't really like the "feel" of the synthetic fabric. How much of the Monaco Subratex is synthetic versus natural? It's not terribly clear from the website what's used where.
Jason
Good point! Please post a review once you get your jacket -- my old MtM Stenvaag has never fit well (very tight in the armpits and upper arm) but I've never bothered to send it back to Anschutz for adjustments.Sparks wrote:From reading the catalog, everywhere that looks like white canvas in that image is the subratex material. I guess the feel is a subjective thing - I thought the synthetic stuff in the AHG fusion jacket was pretty nice myself, and given how grotty my canvas jacket's gotten in the last eight years, I don't have any particular love for the material :D
Jason