Why are we not better today than 20 years ago

333smitty said:
Mike,

Have you ever competed in a U/L regional event with your AR's. Wouldn't they be legal in the U/L class if you loaded them one round at a time?

Can they agg with a "state of the art" BR rig? I own a Colt Elite and I am very interested as to how well a tricked out AR would perform at a real BENCHREST match...

Vic
Click to expand...

pics have been posted in the past. club matches only to date. tricked is close but not fully. single shot rifles, SLED's in the mag wells. lite, but not lite enough triggers. 3" flat forearms. 36x luepolds, good rests. the std ar buttstock needs some additions to get it flat bottomed( low angle).
and then just more bench time for me. i just ordered a 6mm beggs reamer to replace the 6ppc chamber. the 223 is ag'ing in the 0.19 area. the lack of camming in the ar bolt is an issue. some bolts are hand operated, the 223 is gas open, but the gas system can be turned off.
i dont have enought time to make it all right, i like playing with them a little at a time. i shoot lots of rifle and pistol competition. and...just started a 1000 yd rifle project.

i like tinkering

mike in co
 
Jim, some thoughts:

I took a few minutes to look at the records and two things are pretty evident:

First, we shoot light and heavy varmint at 100 and 200 yards more frequently than all the other classes and yardages combined. We basically get only one chance per year to shoot sporter, unless a range (like Midland or Rachael's Glen) holds a one-yardage four-gun. And sporter is usually held at a Nationals, whose venues are not usually the easiest ranges that we shoot.
That being said, Russ Boop broke the sporter 100 record and Bill Goad broke the Light Varmint 100 IBS records last year at your range. And Bill and Gene Bukys broke the Light Varmint grand IBS (Bill immediately after Gene set it in an earlier relay).

I have never shot a 200-300 event in the NBRSA and can only think of maybe one or two ranges that hold 300-yard group matches. We rarely shoot five-shot unlimited or at 300-yards in the NBRSA. And the IBS rarely shoots Heavy Bench at the longer distances (usually not more than once or twice per year) and with the lower-shot count in that class.

And then we look at the meter distances, heck the only range in the country that held matches at those distances (Painted Post) doesn't hold matches any more. Several 100- and 200-meter records were set at Painted Post in 2002. And I can't remember ever seeing an NBRSA match held in the US using a meter designation. I guess that the European matches are designated in meters, but again, those are held rather infrequently.

So, the first point is that the only really frequent opportunities to break those records are in Light and Heavy Varmint at 100 and 200 yards, unless someone has a really good day or two at a Nationals venue or at a non-US, meter-designated World Team match. Of the 48 NBRSA group categories, only ten are shot frequently enough to give legitimate opportunities to break those records. And the same comment can be made of the 76 IBS group categories. Not too good of odds in my estimation.

The second thing is that we have broken records, or at least submitted "possibles" quite recently for LV and HV in both organizations. The NBRSA website doesn't show Lowell Hottenstein’s NBRSA LV grand set during 2008 replacing the 1998 record set by Dick Howell. (I am still a little befuddled how Lowell's LV 100 range-measured at .1348 didn't break Jef Fowler's .1500, but yet the grand still measured below the .1786.)

And I know that there was at least one range-measured NBRSA HV grand submitted that was below Clearance Hammonds .1773, but it didn't stand up. Without checking with the Records Chair, I may be understating the number of "possibles" submitted every year.

Not to take anything away from any of the reord-holders (especially since I have never threathened any of them in my onerous career), but one view can be taken that the single group records are bordering on "five well-placed, but fortuitous shots". This could be said because in not one single case did those same shooters set the yardage or grand record in the same match for any of the standing records for a single group. One may not likely make that statement (for which I may be drawn and quartered) about yardage or grand aggregate records. Given that most of the yardage and grand records for HV and LV in the IBS have been set in the recent era (post 2000 for sake of argument), I guess that maybe we are shooting better today than in the pre-2000 era.

I will say that my personal observation is that it is getting more difficult to win today than it was when I started in 1996; even more so in the past five years. There are more great shooting rifles, better barrels and bullets and the optics are much better. And the free flow of competitive information is more readily available either by reading one of the great books available (or coming shortly) or by teaming up with a knowledgeable mentor. Shooting styles have become more geared toward shooting defensively (again, in my observation). But I believe that is because competitive shooters want to win more so than strive (continually and most often with much dismay) to shoot that once-in-a-lifetime group or aggregate. That may not seem an altruistic goal, but if shooters don't have something positive to get out of their efforts, they usually leave the game. Heck, when I started the conventional wisdom was that it took a shooter five years to get "competitive" (Tony Boyer not withstanding.) Today, I have seen guys win Nationals and set records who have just barely been in the game for five years. (Look at what Larry Costa and Harley Baker have done in their relatively short careers.) That can only be attributed to the free flow of competitive information (if one chooses to listen and follow that information).

So, what I guess I'm saying is that there is more pressure being asserted on the HV and LV aggregates today (again, my observation - but, supported by facts). And, since we have several record categories that don't have opportunities to be contested in any great numbers, it is likely that those other records may stand for a long time. I, personally, like to see sporter and unlimited contested at more "shootable" venues and more often. And I like the idea of an joint unlimited/heavy bench five- and ten-shot weekend being held someday in my lifetime. But, getting ranges to hold those types of matches may be problematic.

Jim, I guess I don't agree with your observation for the classes and yardages that we shoot most frequently. I reserve the right to agree to disagree, in a friendly manner.
 
Last edited:
Mustafa

Gene Bukys is now the head of the records committee, and he has dedicated his self to rectify the faults in the system..........jackie
 
Does anyone have any explanation or reason for this?

Jim
If I remember correctly it is several things. The trigger sear putting to much tension on the bolt when in the cocked position, water in the barrel and our tuners don't work because they don't stop the muzzle vibrations. I think there was more to it but that is what I learned in the last few years.:D
 
James

In our Region, we have seen a steady increase in the number of shooters who are capable of winning.
Much of this is due to the sharing of info, and lots of range time.

Benchrest has never been about shooting a small group, it has always been about shooting competitive groups over a entire aggregate. The aggs, in my opinion, have steadilly come down in the past decade.

A good example is Unlimited. When I won the 100 Unlimited at St Louis in 2000, I shot a agg od .238 for eight 10-shot groups. At that time, that was the second smallest agg on the traveling trophy which date back to the early '50's. Since then, there have been six shot that were better, including a sub .200 a few years ago.

When Charles Huckeba set the current 200 record a couple of years ago, he literally blew the old one out the window.

As for the Bag Gun Classes, I can remember when a .300 would win most Two Guns. Now, you better be closer to .250 or better. That is, if the conditions are any where near readable.

You mentioned bullets. Do you really think we have anything as good as the old Eubers. That die was one in a billion, and for some reason, has never been duplicated. While there are some great bullets being made, the standard still seems to be that bullet.

As for records, while they may instill pride in those who are fortunate enough to rise to the occasion, that is about all they are good for. Sure, we all marvel for that moment, and congratulations are always in order. But, when you sit down at the bench the next time, it is just one of many good groups shot during any agg.

We have at least two single group records that were backed up by huge ones. One record, the shooter came in dead last in the agg. For competitive purposes, All the shooter did was waste a good group.

There seems to be a movement cropping up that wants to make "agg" a dirty word. Most of this comes from shooters who do not want to spend the time and money that it takes to keep a Rifle going for an entire aggregate. Or, they do not understand that Registered Competition is first, and foremost, that, a Competition. The Sanctioning Bodies set up standards for classes, we build to suite, and Compete. It is no different than any other Sanctioned Activity, whether it be NASCAR Racing, Golf, or Tiddly Winks.

In short, I truely believe that while the aggs might not be that much better, there are many more shooters who are capable of winning, either through equipment or shooting skill. This is due mainly to the free flow of information, and of course, manufacturers such as Keblys making state of the art equipment more available to everybody.

Which brings us to a real question. Just how good can these things get, especially considering that we have to shoot out doors, in what ever the range has to offer. Once you reach that magical number of the "sub .200 agg", the requirements to go lower become virtually impossible if you plan on doing it on a regular basis.........jackie
 
Last edited:
When I first started getting interested in BR I read the article on the Houston warehouse. I thought to myself "What the hell chance do I have if back in the early 80's a guy had a gun that agged in the .03's."
I have been a sideline guy for a while now, and am taking the steps to compete and run matches in my area. What my thoughts have brought me to is that we are striving to do what they did back then, but outside.
The guns have always been able to do it, we've just had to find the skill to make it happen, and have a greater selection of guns that can do it. Maybe those guns that didn't pass muster in the warehouse would be fewer in number these days, or the fliers would be not as far out. What I remember reading about virgil's gun is that the tolerances were incredibly tight and wouldn't be amenable to "running and gunning", and thus maybe not amenable to competition (I can't say for sure, I wasn't there...I was 5yrs old).

I think another interesting thought would be "what were the agg's for all competitors in those matches back then?" I would bet that there aren't as MANY low scores as there are now.

My $.02.
Mike
 
Mike

Being from Houston, the old Ware House test are the thing of legend.

Untill you talk to many of the shooters who were actually part of it.

What if you learned, after reading all of the Ware House articles, that the primary shooter involved never won a single agg in Registered Competition........jackie
 
Jackie,
Great point. I'd have to say the same thing that I think whenever I read a journal article on the newest drug in a controlled study: "That's all well and good, but what does it do in practice. How will it react in MY patients." Too many times what works in a lab does not follow through in real life. I guess it is still intriguing to me that someone could have even approached consistency like that...controlled environment or not. The fact that the gun and shooter could do it is what drives me. I want to shoot small groups all the time.

When you can pick and choose your conditions statistics can be twisted to fit the author's point, and can be made to look better than they actually are.

so much to learn....

I can't wait to shoot this year.
 
6 months later...................

this still has not shown up in the record listings, nor have I heard that it has passed the record committee process. Scarce records of late?

Truly an amazing records feat, and not just a one group wonder, beating previous records by a wide margin.

Sure hope this has not dropped into the missing abyss of lost records.....Don

x3eefl.jpg
 
One Area in Benchrest

Where a number of the old records have been broken in the past few years is in the SCORE end of things. I have witnessed a number of them being broken and will say that some of them were shot in less than "Perfect" conditions.

One of the SCORE records that has stood for a very long time is Joe Gilbert's Varmint Hunter record @ 100; 250-23x, which was shot with a 6PPC Varmint Hunter rifle. Could be a long time before it is broken.

The 30 BR has broken a number of the old records in recent years. It has also demonstrated that it is capable of winning Group matches so perhaps, the Tools of the Score trade have improved some but Frank McKee seems to continue to saw away at the records with the chamberings he has traditionally shot so perhaps we all continue to improve.
 
Last edited:
It would seem to me that it's tougher to be in the winners circle now more than ever before. And I think the components, metallurgy, and methods are better now than before. The competitors are just as good if not better than yesteryears. So why haven't the overall groups gotten smaller in proportion to the advances? You would think that in this day in age, we'd be agging in the zeros and setting records everywhere. But we're not and I think the reason is our wind flags.

Surely if you took 10 rifles from 1980 and fired them in a tunnel with peak loads and took their average group size, then did the same thing with 10 rifles of today, I'll bet there aren't too many guys who would wager in favor of the old guns averages. So our flags and ability to read them seem like the obvious bottom denominator.

I have long contested that our flags only measure two dimensional vectors and I believe we're not getting the whole story. We are shooting in three dimensional vectors in reality and there is simply no way our current wind flags and wind probes are going to register downdrafts, updrafts, turbulence, and thermal pockets. Our bullets are going through these anomalies whilst our flags hold still as if nothing was going on at all.

Perhaps one day, we will be using current technology for wind indicating to compliment our current technology in firearms and we will be agging in the zeros while asking ourselves how the heck we ever shot as good as we did using those old fashioned wind thingies for so long. But until that day comes, I think we are stuck shaving .001" or two off the current records once in awhile.

Or maybe we just need to switch over to AR15's and the records will fall like the stock market!;):D
 
They didn't have viagra in the 60's,70's,&80's.That stuff will mess your eyes up.
 
Don, Gary did get the record...

it is on the inside back page of the February 2009 NBRSA News. It is recorded as 0.1233. The photo of Gary with his targets you posted is something to behold...those are great groups! Also, Gary is one of the great gentlemen in our sport so it couldn't happen to a more deserving person.

Congratulations Gary.

Jim
 
Jim Erickson said:
it is on the inside back page of the February 2009 NBRSA News. It is recorded as 0.1233. The photo of Gary with his targets you posted is something to behold...those are great groups! Also, Gary is one of the great gentlemen in our sport so it couldn't happen to a more deserving person.

Congratulations Gary.

Jim
Click to expand...


Jim,

Good to hear, and well deserved...............Don
 
18 New NBRSA records...

in center fire benchrest have been recognized since 2000...that is a pretty fair number in a relatively short period. That is 18 out of the 48 recognized world records established in this decade...I think both the shooters and equipment are keeping up with the times.

Jim
 
Jim,

if in fact the shooters today are not better than shooters twenty(20) years ago, maybe it is because today, targets are measured MORE ACCURATELY and VERIFIED more closely.
 
Edwin D said:
Jim,

if in fact the shooters today are not better than shooters twenty(20) years ago, maybe it is because today, targets are measured MORE ACCURATELY and VERIFIED more closely.
Click to expand...



NAW...MY CALIPERS ARE OVER 30 YRS OLD...lol
 
Edwin D,

The scrutiny of record targets in "days of yore" was competent and as good as today's process. Speaking for the IBS, the measurement or scoring of "possible" targets is performed at the highest level of accuracy to assess and verify records. That statement applies to current practice AND for the past. For many years, the same three extremely qualified persons (Michelle Sutton, Larry Hertzog and Bobby Hart) ably handled these duties. The committee is now under the leadership of Kent Harshman who is assisted by Dave Tooley and Bobby Hart. By the way, this committee is appointed-and not elected-to ensure that only those with established knowledge and experience are charged with this important task. If I am not mistaken the reticules used by the committee members are the same ones used since 1970. That practice was done specifically to ensure consistency of measurements.

Jeff Stover
IBS President
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top