41magnut, slap a scope on that Palma rifle, slip a bipod under the fore end, and come play with the F-TR gang.

I have considered this, & I could do it without the bi-pod, unless the rules changed since last I looked.

German Salazar, one of my favorite shooting sports writers, talked about shooting F Class after a shoulder injury ended his sling supported shooting. He highly recommended the cross training exposure. Sadly German has moved on to other interest, really miss The Rifleman's Blog.

Maybe.......I'll call Competition Machine and inquire about a tripod?

"The .30-06 is never a mistake." Townsend Whelen :iwo:

Yeah, the rules for F-TR are bipod and/or sling. No tripod.

I don't know of anyone shooting F-TR with a sling, at least not with any level of success. Even if you do well for your own gratification, you will be way behind the curve. The level of competition has risen dramatically in the last 7-8 years or so.

About the only time the F-TR scores are much behind those of F-Open is when the conditions are very bad and the limitations of a .308 bullet fired from a .308 Winchester case are just too much of a drag compared to the high BC 7mm and heavy .308 bullets fired from case with 2-3X the capacity of the .308 Winchester.

Also, the F-Class target is one quarter the size of the target you are used to.

BTW, just a heads up, I will be opening the registration for November TSRA MR on June 1. I hope to see you there.

41magnut, slap a scope on that Palma rifle, slip a bipod under the fore end, and come play with the F-TR gang.

I have considered this, & I could do it without the bi-pod, unless the rules changed since last I looked.

German Salazar, one of my favorite shooting sports writers, talked about shooting F Class after a shoulder injury ended his sling supported shooting. He highly recommended the cross training exposure. Sadly German has moved on to other interest, really miss The Rifleman's Blog.

Maybe.......I'll call Competition Machine and inquire about a tripod?

Ditto on what Peg said about F-TR.

If you are content, with not being as competitive as you can be, sling away.

I am not sure about this, but I believe the Palma X- Ring is 1 MOA in diameter-Am I correct on that?

In F-Class, whether Open or TR, the X-Ring will be a half MOA in diameter.

Sling up, fall in, have fun. I have shot MR matches with my service rifle. For me they are great 600 yard practice, and I havent embarrassed myself to badly. My problem right now is ammo. I have enough 600 yd bullets to shoot EIC's this year. Not enough to shoot them in XTC or any type of practice. I really wanted to shoot the MR matches because I felt that that helped me more than anything else dressing up my 600yd scores and I know I give up a few points there. With a SR, there is NO pressure because unless an angel pats you on the butt, you wont win, so you can take your time and shoot 66 rounds for form, trigger, and breath control on a 600 yd range.

I am stretching out some 77's tonight and going to test fire a couple. Havent shot 77's at 600 for a while, but I have them so they are going to be used until I run out of primers and powder.

It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.

41magnut, slap a scope on that Palma rifle, slip a bipod under the fore end, and come play with the F-TR gang.

I have considered this, & I could do it without the bi-pod, unless the rules changed since last I looked.

German Salazar, one of my favorite shooting sports writers, talked about shooting F Class after a shoulder injury ended his sling supported shooting. He highly recommended the cross training exposure. Sadly German has moved on to other interest, really miss The Rifleman's Blog.

Maybe.......I'll call Competition Machine and inquire about a tripod?

Ditto on what Peg said about F-TR.

If you are content, with not being as competitive as you can be, sling away.

I am not sure about this, but I believe the Palma X- Ring is 1 MOA in diameter-Am I correct on that?

In F-Class, whether Open or TR, the X-Ring will be a half MOA in diameter.

If, I can help enable in any way, let me know

Ernie, you are completely correct. The Palma X-ring is indeed 1 MOA and the F-class centers have a 1/2 MOA center. That makes the Palma rings 4 times the area of the F-class rings. We are not all phenomenal shooters like you with a perfect waterline, shooting in one dimension targets. Our targets are two-dimensional and there is a square in the equation for the area.

I knew the F-class targets had been reduced at some point in time.

I thought perhaps they had been reduced again, and I missed the change?

H-E- Double hockey sticks, sooner or later the F- open guys are gonna want to start measuring group size!

Has this threat been hi-jacked?

The F-class targets were sanctioned by the NRA in 2007 when they added rule 22 in the High Power rulebook introducing F-Class with 2 sub-classes: F-Open and F-TR. They share the same overall target as the regular High Power targets but add a new center ring measuring about 0.5MOA at all distances.

The High Power target rings are NOT exact MOA dimensions, they are approximations. For instance the LR target (800-1000 yards) has a 10 inch X-ring, a 20 inch 10-ring, a 30 inch 9-ring, a 44 inch 8-ring and a 60 inch 7-ring.

The F-Class LRFC target has a 5 inch X-ring, a 10 inch 10-ring, a 20 inch 9-ring, a 30 inch 8-ring, a 44 inch 7-ring, and a 60 inch 6-ring. Both targets are on a 72X72 inch target backing.

As you can see the LRFC has a ~0.5MOA X-ring, whereas the LR target has a ~1.0MOA X-ring. The LRFC target has not changed since it was introduced in 2007. The LR target has not changed since it was introduced sometime in the 1980s (I don't remember exactly, but when I started High Power/Fullbore in 1981, the LR target was 12 feet wide. It changed during my temporary switchover to IPSC. When I came back to Palma and Service Rifle in the 90s, the switch had occurred.

Now people look at this and say: "The F-class is half the size of the High Power target (0.5MOA Vs 1.0 MOA X-ring)." And stop there. However, that's only half the story, and most people seem to forget that we shoot on 2-dimensional targets: There is a height and there is a width. We shoot on an area, not a line.

The formula to calculate the area of a circle is A= Pi() * (R*R) or Radius squared. So the area of the LRFC X-ring with a 5 inch diameter is 3.14159 X (2.5*2.5), 3.14159 X 6.25 square inches for a total of 19.7 square inches. The area of the LR X-ring with a 10 inch diameter is 3.14159 X (5*5), 3.14159 X 25 square inches of a total of 78.5 square inches.

Now, in my book, 79 divided by 20 is about 4. So the LR X-ring is 4 times the area of the LRFC X-ring. Of course, that will hold true for all the other rings. Rule of thumb, as soon as you see a square in a formula, doubling one value likely quadruples the result.

My little side joke about Ernie's waterline was simply pointing out that doubling only counted if you shot on 1-dimension targets, or had a perfect waterline.

Ernie, I still fondly remember the 2013 NRA and World F-class matches and spending some time chatting with you and Seb. I missed you at the Worlds in 2017 in Ottawa. It will be long time before the Worlds come back to North America, I will probably be too old to shoot in them when they do come back, but I will try.

There is always someone who has to make it sound even harder.......

Yeah, life was so much easier with a Service Rifle. I could carry around all my equipment and ammo in a backpack or drag it a little 2-wheel grocery cart. Now it's the back of my SUV transferred to a 4-wheel cart. It's the inverse of the target.

So when you have a smaller X, you need to compensate.....

Exactly correct. We compensate with bigger optics (make of that what you will,) and bigger bipods (same aside as before.)

Regardless of ring size, I am always impressed when the slingers and especially the Service Rifle folks shoot a 1000 yard match alongside us the F-classers. To be able to reliably hit the target and get a score with a 20inch AR-15 shooting a .224 caliber bullet is a feat. I lent my CWS to a friend who insists on shooting SR at 1000. He was blowing primers all the time because he was loading so hot. He even busted an upper with his thermonuclear loads. The CWS seems to have helped and he can actually finish a match without breakage. I have a couple of those devices. I needed it in my 26 inch AR-15 when I was shooting F-TR with it. It was fun hearing the crunching of the powder when seating a long-for-caliber .224 bullet. I shot 80 grainers JLKs.

Hi. Sorry to be so long in responding. Work has been a bear and we just completed a massive delivery to a customer this morning, so now I'm giddy. And have a bit of time.

Yes, the CWS to which I referred is indeed a Carrier Weight System. It's a doodad invented and sold by David Tubb. Essentially, it's an insert that you add to your BCG (Bolt Carrier Group) in your AR to **** the unlocking and extraction at firing time. When you use very hot ammo (the stuff that NATO ammo wishes to be when it grows up), the bolt may start to unlock too early and the cycle will be more violent than usual, messing up your cases, popping primers, piercing primers, etc.

The CWS is a holder that fits in the rear of the BCG. It also some with 2 extra weights, one in stainless steel, the other is made of carbide and is more dense, heavier that the SS one. I added one to my NM AR-15 when I was doing XTC and shooting at 600yards with pretty hot ammo. Then I switched to F-TR and loaded some really hot ammo for the trip to 1000 yards. I have that rifle tuned to drop the cases "gently" at 4 o'clock, 3 feet away. No primers popping or piercing.

I added one to my AR-10 as these are notorious for early unlocking as can be seen on many videos. After a bit of fiddling around, I got my AR-10 to drop the cases at the same 4 o'clock position.

David Tubb no longer sells these, but they did tell me they have seen renewed demand, so that may change their mind. I lent one of my CWs to my friend before he breaks another upper.

The F-class targets were sanctioned by the NRA in 2007 when they added rule 22 in the High Power rulebook introducing F-Class with 2 sub-classes: F-Open and F-TR. They share the same overall target as the regular High Power targets but add a new center ring measuring about 0.5MOA at all distances.

The High Power target rings are NOT exact MOA dimensions, they are approximations. For instance the LR target (800-1000 yards) has a 10 inch X-ring, a 20 inch 10-ring, a 30 inch 9-ring, a 44 inch 8-ring and a 60 inch 7-ring.

The F-Class LRFC target has a 5 inch X-ring, a 10 inch 10-ring, a 20 inch 9-ring, a 30 inch 8-ring, a 44 inch 7-ring, and a 60 inch 6-ring. Both targets are on a 72X72 inch target backing.

As you can see the LRFC has a ~0.5MOA X-ring, whereas the LR target has a ~1.0MOA X-ring. The LRFC target has not changed since it was introduced in 2007. The LR target has not changed since it was introduced sometime in the 1980s (I don't remember exactly, but when I started High Power/Fullbore in 1981, the LR target was 12 feet wide. It changed during my temporary switchover to IPSC. When I came back to Palma and Service Rifle in the 90s, the switch had occurred.

Now people look at this and say: "The F-class is half the size of the High Power target (0.5MOA Vs 1.0 MOA X-ring)." And stop there. However, that's only half the story, and most people seem to forget that we shoot on 2-dimensional targets: There is a height and there is a width. We shoot on an area, not a line.

The formula to calculate the area of a circle is A= Pi() * (R*R) or Radius squared. So the area of the LRFC X-ring with a 5 inch diameter is 3.14159 X (2.5*2.5), 3.14159 X 6.25 square inches for a total of 19.7 square inches. The area of the LR X-ring with a 10 inch diameter is 3.14159 X (5*5), 3.14159 X 25 square inches of a total of 78.5 square inches.

Now, in my book, 79 divided by 20 is about 4. So the LR X-ring is 4 times the area of the LRFC X-ring. Of course, that will hold true for all the other rings. Rule of thumb, as soon as you see a square in a formula, doubling one value likely quadruples the result.

My little side joke about Ernie's waterline was simply pointing out that doubling only counted if you shot on 1-dimension targets, or had a perfect waterline.

Ernie, I still fondly remember the 2013 NRA and World F-class matches and spending some time chatting with you and Seb. I missed you at the Worlds in 2017 in Ottawa. It will be long time before the Worlds come back to North America, I will probably be too old to shoot in them when they do come back, but I will try.

Crickets! Took me 30 minutes to read this....... kept falling asleep like I was back in HS math class.

For the great unwashed, & non-engineer types with us, the F-class center scoring rings are 1/2 is close enough. It is just a black dot to a sling&irons shooter anyway.

When I'm shooting sling supported & Iron sights on an F-class target, (which happens more times than not these days), I get a point to compensate for the size difference. A 10 is scored as an X, 9, scores as a 10 and on it goes.

"The .30-06 is never a mistake." Townsend Whelen :iwo:

Yes indeed the LR aiming black is 44 inches regardless of the center. And if you think slingers are not prima donnas, let me dissuade you of that thought. Since some of the slingers are now using scopes on their rifles, I have had to make sure to squad slingers on targets that do NOT have an F-class center because when they see that 1/4 size X-ring in the middle of the target through their 4.5X or 12X scopes, that makes them feel, hmm, err, inadequate.

On the other hand, the non-F-class center looks positively huge when I look at it at 50X through my 10-60X56 riflescope.

Just another day in the life of a match director. (Walking away sighing and shaking my head.)

If you lived by me, I would let you use my TR rifle

Two comments:

1- Nobody lives by you.

B- Why would you lend him a TR gun, we're trying to entice him over to F-class, no more sling.

No one on this forum lives near me, but IF he did, he would be welcome to shoot either my F-TR 308 or my F-Open 284 Winchester, and I would shoot the other one.

My TR rig is not sling compatible...But it shoots great with the JOY-POD, soon to be JOYPOD-X

I see the confusion and it's my fault. I blame age.

When you talk about a TR gun, I keep thinking you mean a Target Rifle, the terminology I grew up with in Fullbore and Highpower, to differentiate from Service Rifle. Indeed that's where the "TR" comes from in "F-TR". As history records, an old Canadian fullbore shooter petitioned the DCRA to allow him to continue shooting if Target Rifle in competition but with a riflescope (old eyes) and a bipod (old arms.) That took off and jumped borders and oceans. They named the discipline after him, I am talking about the late and eponymous George Farquharson out of BC.

I still have my original TR rig, an old 96 Mauser action with a 30 inch blued barrel and Parker Hale peep sights. I have not shot in decades. I should pull out my old shooting jacket and strap on that rifle and take it to a match.

Yeah, I heard from Seb about the upcoming Joypod-X. I'm so pleased that it's doing well. I really like my Joypod.

## Replies

1,226Senior MemberGerman Salazar, one of my favorite shooting sports writers, talked about shooting F Class after a shoulder injury ended his sling supported shooting. He highly recommended the cross training exposure. Sadly German has moved on to other interest, really miss The Rifleman's Blog.

Maybe.......I'll call Competition Machine and inquire about a tripod?

2,799Senior MemberI don't know of anyone shooting F-TR with a sling, at least not with any level of success. Even if you do well for your own gratification, you will be way behind the curve. The level of competition has risen dramatically in the last 7-8 years or so.

About the only time the F-TR scores are much behind those of F-Open is when the conditions are very bad and the limitations of a .308 bullet fired from a .308 Winchester case are just too much of a drag compared to the high BC 7mm and heavy .308 bullets fired from case with 2-3X the capacity of the .308 Winchester.

Also, the F-Class target is one quarter the size of the target you are used to.

BTW, just a heads up, I will be opening the registration for November TSRA MR on June 1. I hope to see you there.

7,881Senior Member"The Un-Tactical"

7,661Senior Member2,799Senior Member7,881Senior Member"The Un-Tactical"

1,226Senior MemberHas the F class center been reduced ? No, wait, I re-read some of the other post. Math has never been my strong suit.

re: TSRA MR - Still awaiting CO draw results.

7,881Senior Member"The Un-Tactical"

1,226Senior MemberI thought perhaps they had been reduced again, and I missed the change?

H-E- Double hockey sticks, sooner or later the F- open guys are gonna want to start measuring group size!

Has this threat been hi-jacked?

7,881Senior Member"The Un-Tactical"

7,661Senior Member2,799Senior MemberThe High Power target rings are NOT exact MOA dimensions, they are approximations. For instance the LR target (800-1000 yards) has a 10 inch X-ring, a 20 inch 10-ring, a 30 inch 9-ring, a 44 inch 8-ring and a 60 inch 7-ring.

The F-Class LRFC target has a 5 inch X-ring, a 10 inch 10-ring, a 20 inch 9-ring, a 30 inch 8-ring, a 44 inch 7-ring, and a 60 inch 6-ring. Both targets are on a 72X72 inch target backing.

As you can see the LRFC has a ~0.5MOA X-ring, whereas the LR target has a ~1.0MOA X-ring. The LRFC target has not changed since it was introduced in 2007. The LR target has not changed since it was introduced sometime in the 1980s (I don't remember exactly, but when I started High Power/Fullbore in 1981, the LR target was 12 feet wide. It changed during my temporary switchover to IPSC. When I came back to Palma and Service Rifle in the 90s, the switch had occurred.

Now people look at this and say: "The F-class is half the size of the High Power target (0.5MOA Vs 1.0 MOA X-ring)." And stop there. However, that's only half the story, and most people seem to forget that we shoot on 2-dimensional targets: There is a height and there is a width. We shoot on an area, not a line.

The formula to calculate the area of a circle is A= Pi() * (R*R) or Radius squared. So the area of the LRFC X-ring with a 5 inch diameter is 3.14159 X (2.5*2.5), 3.14159 X 6.25 square inches for a total of 19.7 square inches. The area of the LR X-ring with a 10 inch diameter is 3.14159 X (5*5), 3.14159 X 25 square inches of a total of 78.5 square inches.

Now, in my book, 79 divided by 20 is about 4. So the LR X-ring is 4 times the area of the LRFC X-ring. Of course, that will hold true for all the other rings. Rule of thumb, as soon as you see a square in a formula, doubling one value likely quadruples the result.

My little side joke about Ernie's waterline was simply pointing out that doubling only counted if you shot on 1-dimension targets, or had a perfect waterline.

Ernie, I still fondly remember the 2013 NRA and World F-class matches and spending some time chatting with you and Seb. I missed you at the Worlds in 2017 in Ottawa. It will be long time before the Worlds come back to North America, I will probably be too old to shoot in them when they do come back, but I will try.

7,661Senior Member2,799Senior Member7,661Senior Member2,799Senior MemberRegardless of ring size, I am always impressed when the slingers and especially the Service Rifle folks shoot a 1000 yard match alongside us the F-classers. To be able to reliably hit the target and get a score with a 20inch AR-15 shooting a .224 caliber bullet is a feat. I lent my CWS to a friend who insists on shooting SR at 1000. He was blowing primers all the time because he was loading so hot. He even busted an upper with his thermonuclear loads. The CWS seems to have helped and he can actually finish a match without breakage. I have a couple of those devices. I needed it in my 26 inch AR-15 when I was shooting F-TR with it. It was fun hearing the crunching of the powder when seating a long-for-caliber .224 bullet. I shot 80 grainers JLKs.

7,881Senior Member"The Un-Tactical"

7,661Senior Member7,881Senior MemberDo It! Do It!! Do It!!!!!

"The Un-Tactical"

7,661Senior Member7,881Senior Member"The Un-Tactical"

22,256Senior Member7,881Senior Member"The Un-Tactical"

2,799Senior MemberYes, the CWS to which I referred is indeed a Carrier Weight System. It's a doodad invented and sold by David Tubb. Essentially, it's an insert that you add to your BCG (Bolt Carrier Group) in your AR to **** the unlocking and extraction at firing time. When you use very hot ammo (the stuff that NATO ammo wishes to be when it grows up), the bolt may start to unlock too early and the cycle will be more violent than usual, messing up your cases, popping primers, piercing primers, etc.

The CWS is a holder that fits in the rear of the BCG. It also some with 2 extra weights, one in stainless steel, the other is made of carbide and is more dense, heavier that the SS one. I added one to my NM AR-15 when I was doing XTC and shooting at 600yards with pretty hot ammo. Then I switched to F-TR and loaded some really hot ammo for the trip to 1000 yards. I have that rifle tuned to drop the cases "gently" at 4 o'clock, 3 feet away. No primers popping or piercing.

I added one to my AR-10 as these are notorious for early unlocking as can be seen on many videos. After a bit of fiddling around, I got my AR-10 to drop the cases at the same 4 o'clock position.

David Tubb no longer sells these, but they did tell me they have seen renewed demand, so that may change their mind. I lent one of my CWs to my friend before he breaks another upper.

2,799Senior Member1- Nobody lives by you.

B- Why would you lend him a TR gun, we're trying to entice him over to F-class, no more sling.

1,226Senior MemberFor the great unwashed, & non-engineer types with us, the F-class center scoring rings are 1/2 is close enough. It is just a black dot to a sling&irons shooter anyway.

When I'm shooting sling supported & Iron sights on an F-class target, (which happens more times than not these days), I get a point to compensate for the size difference. A 10 is scored as an X, 9, scores as a 10 and on it goes.

2,799Senior Member41Magnut are too funny.

Yes indeed the LR aiming black is 44 inches regardless of the center. And if you think slingers are not prima donnas, let me dissuade you of that thought. Since some of the slingers are now using scopes on their rifles, I have had to make sure to squad slingers on targets that do NOT have an F-class center because when they see that 1/4 size X-ring in the middle of the target through their 4.5X or 12X scopes, that makes them feel, hmm, err, inadequate.

On the other hand, the non-F-class center looks positively huge when I look at it at 50X through my 10-60X56 riflescope.

Just another day in the life of a match director. (Walking away sighing and shaking my head.)

7,881Senior Member"The Un-Tactical"

2,799Senior MemberWhen you talk about a TR gun, I keep thinking you mean a Target Rifle, the terminology I grew up with in Fullbore and Highpower, to differentiate from Service Rifle. Indeed that's where the "TR" comes from in "F-TR". As history records, an old Canadian fullbore shooter petitioned the DCRA to allow him to continue shooting if Target Rifle in competition but with a riflescope (old eyes) and a bipod (old arms.) That took off and jumped borders and oceans. They named the discipline after him, I am talking about the late and eponymous George Farquharson out of BC.

I still have my original TR rig, an old 96 Mauser action with a 30 inch blued barrel and Parker Hale peep sights. I have not shot in decades. I should pull out my old shooting jacket and strap on that rifle and take it to a match.

Yeah, I heard from Seb about the upcoming Joypod-X. I'm so pleased that it's doing well. I really like my Joypod.