AusVarmint

Belated congratulations to Matt Paroz(F Standard) and Rod Davies(F Open) for their wins in last weeks NSW Queens. I believe the conditions were very difficult at certain stages.
Alan Fraser was runner up in F Open as well.
Well done fellas.
Macca

Well done Matt and Shoerooter. Rod did you use Garrys' FB pills in the 284?

Macca, careful leaving that Black pig laying around when Fraser is about. I built it and aJR owned it, so it's bound to have an accident or three. He had a cat once and the dog won't go near the computer.

Tony Z.

G,day Tony. I used Garrys 70gn flatbase bullets in the 22BR and Charles Robinson 168gn flatbase bullets in the 7mm.

I think it needs to be said that Rod won because he shot very well - several of the other rifles performed as well as Rod's. The 6 BR and Dasher were as good for elevation at the shorts, and the 6.5s went as good as Rod's 284 at the longs. Similarly in F-Std, I watched a 5 way shoot-off, and there were more accurate rifles in that class than Matt's.

So its the same old story in F-Class Queens shoots - if you have a rifle that's near enough, then you can win if you're good enough at reading the wind, and have your share of luck.

Alan

Tony Z I guard the Pig very closely .It draws a lot of comments at the range the usual axel comments etc.It is going well.Any failures are strictly the driver.
I am hoping to give it another run at Canberra 1K this weekend coming and maybe the ACT Queens if I can get out of making silage.
Have a good one,
Macca

Alan,

No question really .. equipment will only get you so far. Driver skill is far more variable and wind reading and experience are hard to beat. So it comes as no suprise that Matt won the shoot off he's a class act.

cheers
Rinso

Rod sorry to take so long to get back. The dies Charlie has now are those previously owned by Gary. I did a lot of testing with those same flat base pills in the 162 grain area and they were shot head to head against the 180 and 165 30 cal FB bullets Charlie also makes. The upshot is that the BC i calculated for the 7 mils was about .450 whereas the 165 was about a neat .500 and the 180 was around .520. The 162 is a 15 caliber secant ogive bullet and is essentially the front end of the Amax bullet i have used for years and i believe the dies Charlie has now were made by the same fellow that makes the Amax dies. Without the boattail these bullets are really no better than a 155 SMK in the breeze excepting that they are way better accuracy wise as you will know. The 165 and 180 30 cal bullets are a ten calber tangent ogive and at 1K the 180 CDC will impact to precisely the same POI as the 187 BIB. The reason we do not use them is that they have bearing surface length and pressure ring variations beyond what we consider usable. The 165s and 180s will four shot as good as the best of them, but it is the fith shot that kills the agg.
At about the same time i got Garys' 162 grain 7 mil FB bullets, i got him to make some with his boattail die again at around the 162 grain area. They were just horrible. Measured great, but on the target they were just vacant. After lots of checking of rifle and gear i went back to the bullets and discovered that the boattail was spinning eccentric to the bearing shank. Without that concentricity there is no balance so unfortunately these bullets have been relegated to the fireform bin.
The pic below shows from left, Garys' 7 mil 162s in FB and BT, Finns' 7 mil 162 and 180 BTs, CDC 165 and 180 in 30 cal and KCs 165 30 cal. The end result is that the 30 cals were able to stabilise everyone of these bullets in a 13 or 14 twist while the 7 mils required a nine twist for the 180 grain bullets to work properly, and a ten twist for the 162s. As for ballistics, the 180 CDC is far and away the best with the 162 and 180 Finn easily the worst with their 6 caliber tangent ogive point and huge meplat. Every bullet was out performed in the accuracy department by the 165 KC on the far right. It has a BC of .500 neat and appears to have a double ogive which i suspect to be not by design, but rather by polishing of the point up die. This bullet currently holds the small group at Aus 600 of 1.350" in the one and only match they have been used in. Without doubt if setup properly in a 15 or maybe even 16 twist, the 165 KC could give the BIB a real run for its money. Anyone who has had anything to do with KCs bullets knows his procees is meticulous and to a one, they all shoot very very well.
So Rod, when you eventually do a big 30 like Barry E and Peter De, and i know you will possibly go the FB way again, that 165 KC is the ticket. Well atleast until he does our 200 grainers. But that's a way off yet.

Tony Z.

TonyZ. I have sent you a PM about different flat base bullets. At the NSW Queens I was using the 168gn flat base with the super long bearing surface as shown in your pic, but have ordered a new lot on a shorter 1.2" jacket which will hopefully cure the fouling and pressure problems. I think these will be close to 162gns, so I will be trying to get the velocity up to the next 2900fps node. I will be using these new ones in the ACT Queens. They should be either like a scaled down 187 BIB or a scaled up 6PPC bullet.
With the 22BR I will be sticking with 68-70gn flat bases, until my new 6mm barrel turns up. I have already ordered some flat base 12 ogive bullets off Garry for the 6mm. If the 6mm barrel is a good one, I will use it for all distances in F class and just use the 7m for when I go in Long range F class shoots at Match Rifle competitions. (1000-1200 yds).

At the NSW Queens, the smaller 6mm cartridges did very well, even the 6mm BR and 6 Dasher did well at 800 meters in big winds. Bob Eager took the lead early on with his 6 dasher, but gun problems, cost him points on the last day. It seems the 6mm cases are the most popular now in F class. I think the only non 6mms in open class were mine and Alans 6.5x284.
I was thinking that if we go to electronic targets, the smaller cartridges will have the advantage as we will be able to machine gun the 10 shots as quick as possible as we wont have to wait for targets to be pulled and marked.

Rod,

I hope to have a Dasher going for the ACT Queens, and there are two others bringing Dashers from Vic, plus Paul Read will be there with the 6x47 which broke a range record at the Leeton Fly Shoot. So 6mm may be the norm there. I'll be keen to see how your FB projectiles go. What sort of BC are expecting?

Alan

Rod, PM sent.

Machine gunning of scores in FClass on electronic targets is something that is sure to draw the ire of the castle builders in the sport. I see no place for it myself as FClass, like fullbore, was designed to be a slowfire match. Machine gunning is a SR BR domain mostly and when the conditions allow, is used with either success or dramatic failure at 600 or 1K.
On our newly built range, the decision on whether we use electronic targets or CCTV is yet to be made. But whichever way it goes, the screen will be shut down during the record period, to the shooter atleast, as there is to be absolutely no feedback to the shooter, other than that gained from his or the clubs wind indicators.
Electronic targets will only fuel the arms race in FO where little six mils in multi and drop ported rifle actions will rule the roost. Speed is best done with the modern BR action on slippery sandbags, so guys like Ben C will again have the crooked finger of blame pointed at him for another new reason of an unfair advantage. If any club goes down this path, the first thing that needs to be put in place is a software delay of 15 to 20 seconds on the display of individual shots and not display each shot as a group until the final shot has been fired. Long range shooting is about sighters and memory, and to visually see every shot you have fired in the session, is a new concept for this sport. One i feel will not be universally accepted. Not even by me and i see myself as extremely progressive and open to many things, providing they are clearly within the boundary of the rules. But hey, with shooting a very low priority with me these days and the likes of FClass will probably never see me in it again, my view means shit.

Tony Z.

TonyZ. I agree with you on the delay in software for electronic targets. It should be there to keep the speed of shooting around the same as with normal pull up targets. But until it comes in, I think some people will be trying what they can.

AlanF. I think the BC of the 162gn 7mm bullets will be similar to the .450 BC (maybe .460+)as Tony measured them. Going through my comeups, I think the 168gn ones I used at Malaba would have been about .500BC, but these had there tips pointed. Due to the realy long bearing surface, I could only push them to 2770 fps. After the Queens,I gave the 7mm a realy good clean up and shot a 5 shot group which would have been in the .1s (just looked likean 8mm hole) at 100m, so they are inherently accurate, like a big PPC.
As for the 6mm flat bases. The 1st lot I have ordered will be a 12 ogive, but Garry Liddle has a 15 ogive die coming which will make some slippery bullets. I wont have the 6mm running for the ACT Queens.
The BC of the 22 flat base bullets is about .370, but mine shoots more accurately than my PPC when it is tuned properly.

G'Day All,
I agree with TZ & RD, machine gunning has no place in F class. The future probably is electronic targets and the delay function should be mandatory, at least then everyone has the same wait until they can shoot again unlike the current situation where you can be lucky and get a fast target puller or a agonisingly slow puller!

At least the slower scoring of either electronic delay or manually pulled targets allows the shooter to slow down and have a good hard think about the next shot and the last shot before hastily smacking the next round down range. (guilty of that one!)

BTW, the bullet maker you guy's are talking about, it that Garry Little from Qld? and what is his current contact details please?

Cheerio Ned