F/TR... Really... Who is interested?

Woody_rod · Post by **Woody_rod** » Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:41 pm

Barry Davies wrote:Woody,

You cannot mix FS and F/TR unless of course you restrict F/TR to FS projectiles ( then it's not F/TR is it?) alternatively you allow FS to use F/TR projectiles ( then it's not FS is it?)
People shooting F/TR cannot " be governed under SSR's " as SSR's do not cover F/TR.
So, maybe if you want to introduce F/TR you firstly need to have it recognised under SSR's.

Barry

Jeez, pure genius. Mate, thats what we have been working on now for 6 months. There is no reason at all NOT to make a local restriction for bullet weight to have F/TR shoot with FS. Linda has been shooting F/TR since Easter this year within the FS category - no problems from her point of view. My own rifle will be transferred across to F/TR spec shortly. Both of us use HBC's.

For me, if I wanted to trial heavier bullets in F/TR, I would simply shoot in F Open. There is no problem with any of this, simply having it recognised by the NRAA is the only hurdle.

Tell me this:

If Australia is calling for nominations for the FC world championships in 2013 in both FO and F/TR, how can it do this without accepting F/TR as a discpline? Crazy people over at the NRAA I think....

TOM · Post by **TOM** » Wed Oct 26, 2011 6:25 pm

Woody, Numbers will be the maker or breaker for F/TR in Aus. If enough people want it, it will happen. One things for sure, it wont replace FS in the short term.

3100 fps with your 155? dont encourage people to be stupid about it!

Woody_rod · Post by **Woody_rod** » Wed Oct 26, 2011 6:49 pm

TOM wrote:Woody, Numbers will be the maker or breaker for F/TR in Aus. If enough people want it, it will happen. One things for sure, it wont replace FS in the short term.

3100 fps with your 155? dont encourage people to be stupid about it!

Choose the right cases, powder, strong actions, long barrels - pretty straight forward. There are a lot of TR guys also getting this kind of performance.

TOM · Post by **TOM** » Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:06 pm

Send me a photo of yourself Woody, Ill add it to my book of people I keep a safe distance from while they shoot.

RAVEN · Post by **RAVEN** » Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:40 pm

Barry Wrote

Back to the original question.
How many are really interested in shooting F/TR.
From all that was said on another topic/posts it is apparent that Vic are not going to introduce it, so where are the necessary shooters coming from to make this a viable discipline.
SA -- you are pushing it, how many have you got that are interested?
What about the other states?

Barry I have had 5 ppl from the east that would enter in F/TR for 2012 SARA Queens
And possibly 8 from here and I have a few ideas how I can market this on behalf of the FCASA here in SA to get even more.
Adam will know who's buying the beautifully crafted F/TR bipods :idea:

As with all things it will probably start small and grow from there
Humm I remember you trying out some 190Gr at Horsham one year Barry
You would fit right in I recon :lol:

Cheers
RB

Woody_rod · Post by **Woody_rod** » Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:58 pm

TOM wrote:Send me a photo of yourself Woody, Ill add it to my book of people I keep a safe distance from while they shoot.

LOL.

Barry Davies · Post by **Barry Davies** » Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:55 am

Hi Richard,
Actually they were 175's and still have the remainder of the box ( about 800 )
The rifle weighed 8kg so recoil was minimum. Sorry not really interested in F/TR, prefer to shoot the heavier version.
I think that if F/TR is going to get off the ground some state assoc has to bite the bullet, get serious, and include it in their Queens. I can say with reasonable certainty that it will not see the light of day at country prize meetings in Vic. -- there are 6 divisions now ( 3 TR and 3 F Class ) and any further splits in F Class is not currently viable. Anyone with F/TR aspirations can do either of two things,
Shoot FS with 155's ( or 223 ) as per SSR's
Shoot FO with any weight 308 or 223 as per ICFRA ( any weight projectile )
Actually I prefer the latter then if the F/TR people are unhappy they can campaign to change FO and leave FS alone.

Barry

TOM · Post by **TOM** » Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:02 am

" campaign to change FO and leave FS alone"
Barry, woody was right, that's a stroke of genius.

RAVEN · Post by **RAVEN** » Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:30 am

Barry I don't understand the comments about leaving F-Standard alone I would suggest this is generated by the FS zealots

FS is going well so what are ppl concerned about.

What ppl here (THAT’S SOUTH AUSTRALIA) want is the opportunity to participate in this type of shooting.
What’s wrong with encouraging more shooters to clubs?
I know of ppl that don't participate in Queens at present but would be interested if F/TR were introduced.
I know some FO & FS ppl that will be giving F/TR a go.

" campaign to change FO and leave FS alone"

TOM you started the thread F/TR …REALLY …WHOS INTERESTRED
I have given you some info I know of.

From most of your comments it seems that the thread was set up so you could pull ppl down
Seems like this type of attitude comes from the same hymn book I heard before.
Getting a bit boring really.
I suppose I should have guessed that from the thread title.

BTW not all in SA do agree but the majority at the meeting were the motion was put to include it in the 2012 Queens do want to give it a try.
The State Assoc. has given us the green light subject to numbers at this point in time it seems we will get the competitors required.

We really don’t care what the Mexicans

want to do actually do what you like and with due respect support those that are willing to try some thing different.

What ppl on this forum have to understand is these decisions all be it sometimes left of centre are made by the majority view of the FCASA membership.

Barry I do agree that there are issues with so many divisions as with a lot of things this is new territory and the path in not necessarily that clear.
F/TR may shoot shoulder to shoulder with FS or FO with some limitations.

My personal view is to try and get those Savage F/TR, Tikka and Remmy’s at the clubs and provide a competition that they feel that they would be competitive with in this is not the case when place into FS or FO.

So we should all be working toward attracting new ppl to this sport if people are not interested in doing that don't drag those down that are. :idea:

Good Shooting
RB

TOM · Post by **TOM** » Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:54 am

Raven, it was a simple question that no one can answer, other than a few people "interested", I dont know what that means. I find the whole thing interesting too, but does that mean I'll have a go? your guess is as good as mine as to who and how many will take it on. Only a couple of people seem to be pushing it, Woody has told he has done so for 6 months! yet we still hear nothing about F/TR and it's progression into Aussie shooting.

BTW, F/TR is only F/TR if it is done so using 100% of the rules, if anything is changed, it's simply not F/TR and by doing so it aint no longer a world standard that seems to be a motive for the whole thing. Restricting bullet choice in F/TR would make it into a bullshit version of F standard!

RAVEN · Post by **RAVEN** » Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:11 am

Hi TOM
Yep would agree with you thier but just be aware Tom not everybody that would be interested get involved in these duiscussions
who knows it may not go far but I think its worth a go do you agree :?:

Cheers
RB

Post by **AlanF** » Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:36 am

It really makes you wonder what the motives of some posters are on this issue. There was a huge objection (understandably) to the prospect of F/TR replacing F-Std. But why would you also want to talk down the prospects of a new separate class that promises to bring more shooters onto our ranges i.e. hunting/tactical rifle shooters, plus it gives F-Std shooters an option for shooting internationally.

I think we need to ask some of these negative posters what they really are on about - i.e. what are they trying to achieve by talking down F/TR. And if they say its out of concern for prize meeting organisers, yeah right... :roll:

Southcape · Post by **Southcape** » Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:48 am

We are waiting until the next NRAA meeting, where the F/TR rules have been submitted for approval, and requested they be accepted into the SSR's.

We can only move as fast and the NRAA.

Southcape · Post by **Southcape** » Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:59 am

Personally, the need for a rolling data base of scores, is more important than being able to win a medal.

Should F/TR be slotted into F Open to start, this is fine by me. So long as the results state the shooter is competing in F/TR and not Open.

TOM · Post by **TOM** » Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:08 pm

Sure it's worth a go Raven, But a restricted format is not the way to do it. F/TR is F/TR, anything other is not, that is the point trying to be made. You cant pick and choose, if people want it, they must take it as it is, not pick it apart until they have something that appeals. How many disciplines would we have if we took a little from here and a little from there to suit every possible want or need?