How far with the .223

That was my bad - I didn't know the rule change and posting the picture with the suppressor started it rolling along. My .223 is 22", built for the supperssor but I am getting 2920 with 75 A-maxs so she runs to 1000. I am thinking of trying the 80's - time will tell but my personal opinion if you run the numbers outside of a bigger hole - they are equel in drift and drop and sometimes the .223 even edges the .308 out. It does it with half the recoil, and hlf the cost in components leaving lots of funds for practice.

Monte - I guess I'll have to look funny with a 22" barrel :) Would like to bring it up some with the NRA and High Power officials. Time will telll if they bend. I think the original ban was to stop gases and debbis from being blown on other shooters by brakes. The suppresor does not do that and regardless of the crying of foul - it is a great tool with a purpase. If someone want to drop a 1000 dollars to skirt the rules for a brake thats there buisisness but not my intentions. And not the original reason for the making of the no brake rule.

Gear is always funny at shoots - I seen the new Bi-pod (who knows the cost) for F-T/R on 6mmbr and you can't tell me that is a field bi-pod or military. That is a benchrest with 2 feet. The guys showing up with them no doubt feel they have an edge over shooters with a $89 harris. But, those same "one up gadget guys" would be the first to B**** if someone showed up with A. something they did not have or B. felt it gave another shooter an edge over them. It's a shame and time will tell.

Have a great Christmas

JamieD
 
Last edited:
Travelor said:
Intersting how the thread changed from shooting a 223 Rem at up to 1000 yards to the NRA stance on suppressors.


Yesterday I won our local 1000 yard F/TR class with a 223 in 10-15 mph quartering headwinds . Really a miskleading statement as the otehr competitors were newby's but they were shooting 308 and 30-06 rifles.
George
Click to expand...

Did I miss a rule change? I thought F/TR is .223 or .308 only...
 
I just forwarded a copy of this thread to Janet at the NRA's high power rifle department. I hope that the reasonings and debate is read and suppressors taken back out of the illegal status. Here is a copy of my email -

Hi Janet,
I wanted to ask about the new rules about no Sound suppressores in f-T/R. I know they want high power to mirror military marksmanship. I am a 14 year veteran. The no muzzle brake rule I understand and agree whole heartedly. The rule was made to keep gasses and debris from being blown on shooters by muzzle brakes on the line. Now some see the suppressor as a way to skirt that rule and get a muzzle brake. I dissagree, the suppressor keeps the noise down, it does not blow gasses and debris and was not originally designed to be a brake and under no way does it fall into the reasoning as to why brakes where made illegal. Brakes were not made illegal becouse they control recoil. Further more neither were suppresors.

Please look at this thread as I feel it explains alot. If you could pass it forward to those who write the rules that would be apreciated. I feel the benifits of a suppressor far outway the idea that someone is side stepping the muzzle brake rule. Further more, the millitary is switching to use suppressors in a hurried fashion. They see the benifits to the shooter, battlefield and those around it. I would like to run my .223 tactical build in F-T/R class. It wieghts 17 pounds and by no means needs a muzzle brake. The suppressor was put on becouse of the sound benifits - my hearing has been suverely damaged through years of military and police. Please look at this thread on benchrest central - it really lays out my case and the counter case. http://benchrest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61395

JamieD
 
George,

I'm curious how fast you were punting those 75s. In my wifes gun we were running Berger 80gr VLDs around 2840fps or so. Very accurate, but compared to my (then) normal load of B155VLDs at around 2960fps, they seemed much more... twitchy, I guess is the best term. Tiny fluctuations in the wind that would move a .30 cal bullet X distance seemed to move the .224 pills X plus a bunch. Now granted it was going a bit slower, but to me and the guy pulling his hair out trying to wind coach for me, it was really noticeable - he said he was having to nearly double the corrections over what he'd normally use to get me in the 10 ring. Obviously that doesn't jive with what I've heard from other sources including your report, so I have to wonder where things went awry?

Jamie,

I appreciate your time spent in the military, etc. but somewhere you got this idea that High Power is somehow bound to military shooting and rifles. Other than Service Rifle category in some disciplines such as Across The Course (and if they're feeling brave, Palma), there are little to no military ties in HP otherwise. Whether there should or shouldn't be is a discussion for another time and place, but trying to use 'our military uses them' as an argument isn't likely to help much, unless your intent is to have everybody end up using issue ball ammo.

Monte
 
JamieD,

I'll take half that "MY BAD" as I did the pointing at your stick.....I can see your point, I have used them, they do as they say and can be useful. But I'll stand with my first statment about not being legal in every state as Monte also point out. I cannot even think that in my life time they would be legal for me to own one in New York State, let alone USE. I live almost as far North as one can in New York and still be in the US, I'm 20 miles South of the Canadian Border and 3 miles West of Vermont and I am ruled by laws written to insure the safety of New York City and the other great Metropolis under the States rule. Even in the Great State of Vermont where Full Auto Class III is legal to be owned by private citizens you can not own a can, installed or otherwise. Mostly due to the ability to take game at night without being heard, also known as Jacking, a very big problem in an State with more wildlife than humans.

Back to the .223 question.....I hope to put mine on the line at the Nationals in March pushing 90 Bergers, if my testing doen't work out I'll stick with the 80gr. AMAX, I know they will perform as long as I'm able to do my part with the wind. I'm runing a 1-7" Krieger 28" long on a Rem. 700 sitting on a Harris with Pod Paws, my Laberge Bi-Pod is almost 3lbs so it has to stay on my old Savage 112BT PALMA to help add some weight as my back up rig.
 

Attachments

  • Savage 112BT with LaBerge Bi-Pod.jpg
    Savage 112BT with LaBerge Bi-Pod.jpg
    25.8 KB · Views: 328
Last edited:
Taildrag,
that is a nice rifle - did you do the cheekpiece? I'm hoping withing the next wek or two to hear from the NRA and get a list of states they are legal. I know that alot of states let them, few will publish it or promote them.

Hoping to get to Reade Range in central PA next week to t=do some 1000 Christmas work : )

JamieD
 
JamieD,

It's a Savage Factory 112BT, a Competition rifle they produced in the late 90's/early 2000.

Good luck with the llist.
 
Not yet, Really excited to give it a go. I was tied up this past year pretty good and every fall match I tried to attend it crossed scheduels with other obligations. This year the F-class is going to take priority. I don't mind shooting it without a suppressor. It's a little short @ 22".

JamieD
 
Jamie said:
The no muzzle brake rule I understand and agree whole heartedly. The rule was made to keep gasses and debris from being blown on shooters by muzzle brakes on the line
Click to expand...

If that statement were true we could move those with brakes to the end of the firing line just like we do with service rifle competitors. A muzzle brake constitutes a "competitive edge". Heck I'd love to shoot my .338 ultra with 300gr SMK's at a match for chits and giggles, WITH THE BRAKE INSTALLED! :D

A quick check shows 33 states allow cans, 17 strictly forbid them. IIRC your still at the mercy of local LE as to whether they'll sign off on your application which opens up another "can" of worms. Too much politics to get involved with. I'd love to see cans as a "shall issue" item, don't believe it will be in this lifetime...

Good luck with your endevor, don't spend too much time beating your head against a wall.
 
33 is higher than I expected. I was forwarned about all the hassle the local sherriff can couse - but to my surprise - he signed off like no big deal, with smiles even.

I guess I got a little to bent becouse I just got this set up with a suppressor with the idea it was allowed. Things change, so will I. I still would like to see it legal but see where it could lead with much bigger calibers.

Thanks for everyones patience while I steamed a little.

Have a good Christmas,

JamieD
 
I was forwarned about all the hassle the local sherriff can couse - but to my surprise - he signed off like no big deal, with smiles even.
Click to expand...

Being in law enforcement may have helped.... just a little.

Good Luck with your entrance into F-Class! Lots of good people who are more than willing to help you learn the ropes (and spend your money). Enjoy the challenge.

And a Merry Christmas to you and yours.
 
Monte,

I am getting a velocity of 3048 fps.


Bill Ohio,

Yes, it is not one of the two calibers allowed, but the newby guy showed up and go huffy about it so we let him use it, then changed his classification to F/Open before submission to the NRA. He has not read the rules and thought that anything with a bipod met F/TR.

The fellow was awful in the pits and when the match director explained that he needed to pit up the pace on pulling/marking, he go very defensive. My guess is that he will not show up again. Pitty as we can always use new shooters and tried to help him understand the rules and the need for faster pit service in changing winds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top