• Please consider adding your "Event" to the Calendar located on our Home page!

Large air reservoirs in Competition - unfair advantage?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
If you want a true contest of a person's skills then to minimize all other variables each shooter has to shoot the same rig (same scope, same gun, same pellets, same caliber) otherwise where does the restriction of hardware and modified hardware stop? IMHO IF contestants are unwilling to use the same hardware then the contest should be open for all hardware and modifications a shooter can afford! Phooey on restrictive hardware rules! Drop them into classes as you see fit but do not restrict hardware within the class.
 
Upvote 0
STO that purple 6ppc return to battery-rail gun/ does have to follow rules and regs.in the NBRSA there is specific class for them and also some airgun and rimfire comps. Include classes for 1pc rests, may not be your thing but here again specific rules and regulations, perkyval you are probably right but like I eluded to earlier their event their rules!, by the way campfussel awsome reply👍🏻
 
Upvote 0
I say ban dual bottles, electronic firing controls, weights of gun, trigger weight, barrel length, velocity, pellet weight, age of shooter! Scope power, height of scope above barrel, silencers, muzzle brakes, tuners, barrel liners, twist rates, o-rings, metal stocks, laminated stocks, plastic stocks... it’s endless! Your never going to make everyone happy, if you don’t like the rules don’t compete!, A sanctioning body & specific classes would help for equalizing competition, but that’s not what a dealer/manufacturer sponsored event is all about, it’s sales! remember “what win’s on Sunday sell’s on Monday”
 
Upvote 0
Interesting opinion. I appreciate that. What shooters want are guns like the winners shoot at these so called manufacturer events. Right now they can’t buy what the winners shoot unless they put an extra thousand or two in a $2000 gun, right?

I didn’t read in this post about restricting anything but air capacity? And I did offer the easy solution of tethering.

I’m fine with the EBR rules, and the rules say no double bottles. Easy. Follow the rules or don’t compete. No problem there.

At RMAC they’re allowed but not tethering so I suggested following the rules and strapping a paintball tank to the stock - more air capacity within the rules. Not sure what else to say?
 
Upvote 0
I did infer those comments!, because you inferred having one set of rules to even out competition’s my point is these are dealer run events catered to their sales and products hence the double bottles! And other products sold and patented by lets say the simmons/fx- sideshot etc. if you want to work within the rules to gain more air capacity then figure out a way to do so...
 
Upvote 0
Centercut I’m not trying to be argumentative in anyway, I totally agree with what your saying I believe it’s to everyone’s advantage to have a common set of rules for these new and increasing popular long range and speed style competition’s as of right now there is none?, but we can petition a sanctioning body such as the usarb to include a defined set of rules for new classes of events such as 100yd, speed silo,etc. that would make it more fair for competitors in these new disciplines! Or even better yet come up with our own sanctioning/governing body that would address some of these issues because trust me not all of us can afford to shoot these modded fx’s or Daystate Redwolfs nor want to! I believe these dealer/manufacturers sponsored events( basically showcases for their products, and there’s nothing wrong with this! ) will come to their own demise because of many of the issues you and others described? It might start a revolt because no one will want to attend if they believe they can’t compete fairly (ie.don’t stand a chance.against the BIG DOGS..,) or afford to? I can just set at home and watch the pro’s compete amongst themselves on YouTube!...but then again this is the attraction of competition! “May the little man win”
 
Upvote 0
EBR was originally conceived to showcase a new class of airguns .... "long" range hunters. It was never intended to be a tech/trick accessory development competition. I fully agree with limiting equipment to what you actually might use in the field. Tim Mac won in 2015? with a pure bench gun based on the USFT. There have been numerous custom one offs in it over the years as well but I think the real foundation for the rule changes is getting back to some semblance of the reason the competition was conceived.

I work with Robert on the ART barrel project and can tell you he would definitely like for one of the brands he carries to be successful but he is a realist and knows there are a LOT of good rifles out there. Does taking away the boobie bottle handicap FX.... not at all... they are quite good. It's just a way (imho) of bringing back a little reality to the practical rifle this was conceived around.

On a similar note, AAFTA definitions have changed for the hunter class rifle. I was against this for the same reasons .... it changed what the class was conceived to be. The difference is that AAFTA rules are more or less decided on by the membership and individuals wanted to gain every advantage possible through equipment.... rather than practice. THAT would be the main objection from me for a common rules committee..... allowing a possible perversion of the original intent.

Anyway ... a lot of good thoughts here.

Bob
 
  • Like
Reactions: Centercut
Upvote 0
I think it's a good thing to limit the air capacity of these guns for competition. If you want to shoot super high power and use a lot of air, fine, fill your gun more during competition. This limit could encourage manufacturers and tuners to advance the efficiency of these PCPs.
Click to expand...

Thanks Derrick. My actual thought on that is to make it just like every other type of BR competition. You can’t fill during the relay. This way if you shoot super high power and only get 30 shots, then you limit yourself to 5 sighters. This does what you said, encourage air efficiency. It also injects more skill into the game, since shooting 100 sighters would no longer be an option and shooters would actually have to learn to read the wind. It would drastically increase the skill level required to shoot a good score. And require trade off in power and caliber selection. My “radical” idea is to limit the sighters to 5. Five sighter targets below the line, five sighters. Period. Learn to read the wind, not shoot 100 sighters. ;)
 
Upvote 0
I ended up with Val's Impact that has the boobie bottles, as well as a lot more modifications that she spent over a year preparing for EBR.

I feel her pain, but on the other hand I think it's important to have rules that somewhat even the playing field so that more people would be more inclined to participate.

Having said that, it seems to me that the problem could be solved by instituting something like a Le Mans car race style class system. Just add an unlimited, or experimental class.

That way the developers of these awesome mods, that may not fit within the stricter rules have a chance to show off their mods, that advance our sport, and may actually be accepted at some point.


 
Upvote 0
Exactly as I was saying earlier! Look up the USARB rules for 25m and 50yd comp’s they have opened up 2 of there classes to “open” & “unlimited” this addresses some of the concerns stated in this topic!, now these don’t have to be followed exactly?,but can be modified to better represent long range and speed types of events? But I digress until there’s a sanctioning body involved in these competitions we must follow the rules as written by the organizers of these events!
 
Upvote 0
In my opinion it makes no difference. Everything should be legal. No governing body to impose restriction. Eliminates the arguing. Used to think high $ rigs were better and not fair. Then some years ago at EBR I watched a gentleman lock some skeleton gun like a FWB into a mount that cost more then my pickup. It had a remote trigger pull where he just pushed a button on the end of a wire. He had the most elaborate set of 4 wind flags I'd ever seen. This was all set up on the 25 meter contest. He would set down and turn knobs until his cross hairs were on target where he wanted, then set back not looking through the scope or touching the rifle with his remote firing button in hand and watch the wind flags until they were just right and push the button sending the shot down range. I thought NO WAY is this fair! Guy setting next to him had a marauder on sandbags and ended up with a higher score. After that I believed its the guy behind the gun, BUT even more then that, its the guy behind the gun that's having a really GOOD DAY. sylvan
 
Upvote 0
In my opinion it makes no difference. Everything should be legal. No governing body to impose restriction. Eliminates the arguing. Used to think high $ rigs were better and not fair. Then some years ago at EBR I watched a gentleman lock some skeleton gun like a FWB into a mount that cost more then my pickup. It had a remote trigger pull where he just pushed a button on the end of a wire. He had the most elaborate set of 4 wind flags I'd ever seen. This was all set up on the 25 meter contest. He would set down and turn knobs until his cross hairs were on target where he wanted, then set back not looking through the scope or touching the rifle with his remote firing button in hand and watch the wind flags until they were just right and push the button sending the shot down range. I thought NO WAY is this fair! Guy setting next to him had a marauder on sandbags and ended up with a higher score. After that I believed its the guy behind the gun, BUT even more then that, its the guy behind the gun that's having a really GOOD DAY. sylvan
Click to expand...

When the sponsors write the rules there is no recourse for unfair practices in scoring or bench location. So you can expect the same group of sponsored shooters to win. That is why there is a need for a sanctioning body and set of rules.
 
Upvote 0
Hello all 

Great comments all. The intent for EBR as Bob has expressed was to have a competition for the shooter who owns a typical hunting style air rifle. Same idea with the American FT. The restrictions for air supply is to encourage filling and have some equalizer for power and caliber etc. It may seem a response to a brand but that is not the case. It would be great to see a modified sub 1000.00 dollar rifle win. EBR is an event for the shooters and families that are excited to be around great people and have fun testing their skill with others. With that said we are looking at having a unlimited class next year to satisfy those that want to participate against others in a everything goes class. The big prize money will still be towards the winner with a more standard rifle to keep the spirit of the original EBR. We hope to see all of you soon. 
 
Upvote 0
Good post RB. Appreciate the info from the source. It’s just the answer I had imagined it would be. I’d actually like to see that “regular” class set a maximum number of sighters in order to put more emphasis on shooting skill and wind judgement vice just shooting a hundred or more sighters. Let’s say two or three per sighter target. That would limit the shooter to 10 or 15 sighters and put a premium on wind reading skill. You don’t get to shoot sighters when hunting, why allow so many at EBR? Just a thought FYI...

Mike 
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu