Has Anybody Built, or Seen, a Sporter Based On The New Provisional Rule?

Larry Feusse talked about building one at our last score match in March.

The stock was one thing. But, Larry also mentioned that a front rest top would need to be designed and built.
 
Clarification?

Clarification. I thought the new provisional rule made a sporter and a LV one and the same, i.e., a sporter can now be .22 and it will weigh 10.5 pounds. Am I wrong?
 
The new Provisional Rule does away with just about all stock restrictions in Sporter, such as limits on the width of the forarm and the angle of the butt stock. The stock, however, cannot have any guiding means that would allow true return to battery capabilities.
Also, there are no restrictions on the barrel contour such as what are in place for LV and HV.
And yes, the caliber restrictions have been removed.

The Sporter and Light Varmint Class are still restricted to 10.5 pounds, and HV to 13.5 pounds.

If someone builds a Sporter incorporating the new guidelines, it will not be legal to fired in either HV or Light Varmint, as the stock requirements and barrel contour requirements are still in affect for those classes.

But do keep in mind, none of this prohibits a shooter from simply shooting his current Sporter, or LV, in Sporter Class.

Also, just as a note, where in the past, a legal built to the rules Sporter could be legally fired in all four classes, that now falls to Light Varmint.........jackie
 
Last edited:
Jeez Jackie!

I thought you would be the first to show up with a tricked out Sporter !!!

Now what are we gonna do !?!? :)
 
I think it's going to take some time to see much change in the sporter class rifle. It's possible to build a benchrest rifle in the years trial run for the new sporter class rules, but you'll have to do it with actions that you either have or someone has in stock. The same thing with barrels. If you order components from the manufacturers, you are looking at around 8 months or more to get some makes of actions and some makes of barrels. You're either going to have to build the stock yourself to get it very fast and that may not be quick or have someone make it for you if they are willing to experiment with stock shape. I had a popular benchrest stock put on one of my actions last year and it was about that same 8 months or so getting it.
 
Whose making stuff?

Is there anybody on the band wagon making trick stuff for these new Sporter rules?
 
Good point Mike

Do any of you have plans, or know of someone with plans to cook up a rifle that is different? Not asking what you're actually gonna do because that would take the scare factor out...should there be one.
 
Not tricked out in any unusual way (yet), but I've got a new .222 in the works for my Sporter experiment for this season. Thought is that the PPC dominated the deuce because it was good, and because a 6mm was required. Without the 6 requirement I decided to see how competitive the old cartridge could be with all our modern build techniques. I'm kind of limited on how radical the changes can be because I don't plan on investing in new rest components until I see how it plays.

Rod
 
Last edited:
I think we were the first place in the country to have a match under the new sporter trail rule. We shot the Arizona 4-Gun Championship in January and April. We only had one shooter at the January match that shot a sporter with a differant taper on the barrel. That's the only one so far.

Art Clegg
 
Wilber

I'll throw my hat in the ring. My plan right now is to build a sporter that is experimental in nature, mostly within the stock design. I think this is going to be a difficult venture because of the weight limit. time will tell. It sure would have been nice if the new rules would have allowed us to experiment with some extra weight. 13.5 lb would have been awesome! But has been mentioned the gears are turning slowly. The plan is in my head I just have to have the time to do it and time is hard to come by for a new projects. I hope there will be others that will experiment.... Later, Bro.D
 
There are a few top shooters working with stock makers on coming up with a unit that takes advantage of the new rules, and still allows for a 10.5 pound weight limit.

I would think that the idea of 10.5 pounds was kept in order to actually bring forth new ideas in designs. If the weight was 13.5, what you would end up with would be a trimmed down 600-1000 yard light gun in a short range chambering.

Probably no easy task, but then new innovations often take the best in minds to finally be brought to fruition........jackie
 
Last edited:
Is anyone...

Looking at Shelley Davidsons tubular two piece stock design or some variation? My recollection is it was very light. Ken Livengood was thinking of building a rifle around one, not sure if he ever did.

http://www.accurateshooter.com/guns-of-week/gunweek077/

Remember this was written in 2008 and the IBS has since legalized tuners.
 
Last edited:
Very Accurate

glp said:
Looking at Shelley Davidsons tubular two piece stock design or some variation? My recollection is it was very light. Ken Livengood was thinking of building a rifle around one, not sure if he ever did.

http://www.accurateshooter.com/guns-of-week/gunweek077/

Remember this was written in 2008 and the IBS has since legalized tuners.
Click to expand...



Gene Beggs has said that this rifle was the most accurate rifle ever shot in his tunnel, as I recall.
 
FWIW Gene also makes what is generally referred to as a skeletonized stock. It bears marked resemblance to the ideas Shelly had.
Both however seem to make the fore end attachment to the barrel in some form. I think maybe the key is to make whatever forearm attachment attach to the action so the barrel has no restrictions unless that is of course it could be conceivable to use the attachment to the barrel to cause it to cause a tuning effect.
 
jackie schmidt said:
The new Provisional Rule does away with just about all stock restrictions in Sporter, such as limits on the width of the forarm and the angle of the butt stock. The stock, however, cannot have any guiding means that would allow true return to battery capabilities.
Also, there are no restrictions on the barrel contour such as what are in place for LV and HV.
And yes, the caliber restrictions have been removed.

The Sporter and Light Varmint Class are still restricted to 10.5 pounds, and HV to 13.5 pounds.

If someone builds a Sporter incorporating the new guidelines, it will not be legal to fired in either HV or Light Varmint, as the stock requirements and barrel contour requirements are still in affect for those classes.

But do keep in mind, none of this prohibits a shooter from simply shooting his current Sporter, or LV, in Sporter Class.

Also, just as a note, where in the past, a legal built to the rules Sporter could be legally fired in all four classes, that now falls to Light Varmint.........jackie
Click to expand...

I would hope that the new rules lead to some innovations in .22 caliber which would result in rifles chambered for something other than the PPC family although .22 caliber rifles seem awfully competitive when built on the PPC case. I'm wondering if old experiments with .22s built on the BR case will return. Apparently from what's said in this thread at least CubCouper is going to try the old .222 in Sporter class and there were a lot of variations built on the .222 Mag case. Given today's popularity of the .223 case perhaps it will be the basis for some experiments.
 
ehparis said:
I would hope that the new rules lead to some innovations in .22 caliber which would result in rifles chambered for something other than the PPC family although .22 caliber rifles seem awfully competitive when built on the PPC case. I'm wondering if old experiments with .22s built on the BR case will return. Apparently from what's said in this thread at least CubCouper is going to try the old .222 in Sporter class and there were a lot of variations built on the .222 Mag case. Given today's popularity of the .223 case perhaps it will be the basis for some experiments.
Click to expand...

I doubt if you'll see much experimentation with a BR case in a .22. I've moved shoulders back on them and compared to moving the shoulder back on a .220 Russian it's a royal pain. To move the shoulder back on a .220 Russian case, you push it into a .22-250 die and shorten it as much as you want depending upon how far you push it into the die. Trying to push the shoulder back on a BR case has to be done in steps as it will collapse the shoulder if you try to do it in one pass. I haven't found a die that will do it the same way a .22-250 die will work for a PPC case. Too much work for something that won't out shoot a PPC.

I expect that change will come in the way of stock design as we aren't constrained by the butt taper and width requirements.
 
Sporter matches other than the NBRSA Nationals

I talked again with our "resident experimenter" Larry Feusse at our April WWCCA match.

He is trying to make soemthing up that meets the new sporter rules, but he asked a very legitimate question: can we shoot these animals in any other matches than the Nationals?

I threw the question to our ER director Jack Neary and the discussion went toward changing the format of some of our regional matches from LV-HV to Sporter-HV so that the experimenter can try out their handiwork.

I would quess that the range could change their format by changing their existing 2013 contract to replace LV with sporter and see what comes from that. We would also need to advertise the change in the newsletter.

Any of the other regionals getting that same question or thought process?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top