Thread: "Hunter Class" ?

Out of interest I wonder how many ranges could satisfy the required range template requirements for running a shoot as Woody suggests or grandpamac remembers.

Originally Posted by woods223

Out of interest I wonder how many ranges could satisfy the required range template requirements for running a shoot as Woody suggests or grandpamac remembers.

Greetings,
Regrettably not many and none in Hawkes Bay to my knowledge. There will be ranges that have 100, 200 and 300 metres but the need for 500 metres could be a problem. The shoot could be split over two venues on separate days though. The markers gallery we had at Roy's Hill allowed us to run through the three ranges in 20 minutes or so you could fit a lot of details into an afternoon. The Wilkinson shoot was reduced to 100 metres or yards only and with smaller scoring rings about 20 years back likely due to the lack of ranges and interest.
Regards Grandpamac.

The ranges shot in my suggestion are "in principle" only. However, the ptinciple of acceptable skill should still be applied. For instance; if no 500metre distance is available then a second three shots can be taken at 300m BUT using a "target ( 4 1/2" diameter) 1 and a1/2moa).That will
still be a fairly close eqivalent to a 500m shot at a 10" disc.
I don't support the kneel position S many ( me included) have stuffed knees. Standing, sitting and prone are feasibl positions for most Apply the KISS principle throuhout. The less nitpicky rules the better. A miss is a miss as are wounding shots. No 10-9-8,7,6 etc scoring because a fatal shot placement is the only criteria to win a point IMO for hunting.

While a hunter class seems pretty straight forward on the surface, there is a lot of variables that come in to play. one mans rifle is not the same as anothes and their target object is often different. The quality of the equipment is but one consideration, factory standard? sure but whos factory?
We tried to run graded hunter shoots for many years catering to different levels of enhancements. we had three groups. Standard, modified and open. And yet when hunter A bet hunter B in the same bracket people still complained.
Woody's idea of 1 point for the proper hit is sound, also the mention of a prize table with drawn prizes is a fair way to deal with it. After all we are only competing with ourselves.
Once shooter A and shooter B dont have exactly the same resources of equipment the playing field is tilted.

Or you could have 5 identical rifles that are the only allowed rifles, ammo for it is provided, Ist 2nd etc take the firearm as a prize for a small donation of course

Here’s what I’ve learned from all the shooting comps I’ve been too.
1, Someone will complain regardless of how fair you try make the rules
2, People will always get competitive and try and buy their way to the top
3, Someone will always try and game the rules, not breaking them but not acting in the spirit of the rules

For the most part all these people will never be the best shooters and usually not be even close to winning regardless, as:
4, the best shooters will always win regardless of what gear restrictions/rules you impose

Make rules realistic, fair, and simple.
If people complain and think they are behind hard done by, check to see if they have a point or are just whinging.
Too many rules will be off putting to new shooters, if one guy turns up with a $10,000 Blaser and Zeiss scope, and another a $800 Howa with a $200 Burris, well that’s actually representative of what guys hunt with.

I wasn’t referencing any particular shoot. The nature of the shoot, targets and distances are organisers prerogative and I have no opinion as to what others want to shoot at.
I was opining on the class rules suggested by the OP. If it’s called ‘hunter class’ there’s an implication that it’s for Hunting rifles. I am only curious as to what class restrictions may or may not represent a hunting rifle these days.
In over a decade of competition shooting, I’ve never once seen all competitors completely agree with the organisers course of fire or ruleset, everyone has their own opinion, but you turn up compete regardless because it’s fun.

This may be a stupid idea but Ive often thought how would the shooter nominates his own score and then has to shoot it loosing points either side if he doesnt shoot the score?

Originally Posted by Tentman

Hello all - we are framing up a summer plate series and want to offer a "hunter class" I've looked at the NZDA and NRANZ definitions but Im not really liking them.

My thoughts at this stage are to keep it very very simple. Under 6.00kgs all up and all scopes set to 18x or less.

The series will be shot off mounds at 525Y and 625Y, prone. So maybe saying no F class style bipods but ??

@Tentman. With regard to your origin post I gather you are proposing only shooting prone at %25 and 600+ yards. Your concern zeems to beumitatuons of rifle supports and scope power. I think you also need to consider the actual purpose of your event. I.e.; is it to create a precise scoring competition or to test for acceptable kill accuracy for deer- pig sized game in the real world? The two are poles apart. My earlier posts assumed rge latter by use of 10 inch kill zone sized plates.with a1 point hit, zero point miss scoring system. By using this the potential advantage of those with high end equipment is to some extent nullified compared to more common hunting rifles carried.
There are many shoots and other competitions geared to reward those who can place a bullet in a central scoring bullseye bbut this does not actually reflect the fact that a slightly lesser setup can still successfully achieve a hit in a vital area of the game being hunted. Hence the hint to level the playing field as much as possible. In-field hunting usually does not include sophisticated supports either so skill using a basic bipod or pack and sling and no rear support is a fairer test of huting shooting skill than allowing setting up as if shooting for a high scoring ring as at many range shoots. Your decision of course and I guess your shoot format will ultimately be decided based on what you really define as "a hunter" shoot. Good on you, and i wish you every success for your event. ")

The shoots we will be running are a "precision hunter" concept loosely based on Eric Cortinas Blackjack challenge (shot at 525Y, starts with a 10" plate, goes down to 2") and Texas Plinkers MOA challenge (we'll shoot it at 625Y, with a 2MOA, 1MOA and 0.5 MOA plate sizes). The way these are scored is what makes them challenging and interesting for a wide range of skill levels.

So the series isn't aimed at the bush Hobbits, rather those who are wanting to test their skills a bit further out. A young guy with a "sorted" Tikka should be able to have a go at it, learn something and maybe earn some bragging rights. There will be three go-rounds over 3 months for folk to get the hang of it and a final with grading based on the go rounds. Two classes, Hunter/service rifle and open

So thanks for your thoughts guys, I'm still thinking to keep it simple and say 6.00kgs and 18x.

Have a clause in the rules regarding being a good sport so that if someone takes advantage of a loophole, then a disadvantage will be applied.

When defining class rules I would encourage three things. 1st, focus on the things that actually make a difference to the rifles ability to be shot. In this case I would say you could pretty much just use weight limit and forget all other rules. 6kg is pretty heavy, you could probably go to 5kg and have some wiggle room for rifles that are overweight but clearly hunting guns and not some gamer gun someone is trying to squeeze in with. Weight is with bipod attached to encourage use of lightweight hunting bipods. Don't bother trying to regulate scopes, it's a waste of time. Once you get over about 12 power, it makes next to no difference as you can't spot your own misses with hunting rifles anyway.
Stock style is zero point in regulating. People are now hunting with carbon target type stocks and have a valid argument they should be included.
Cartridge limits or recoil amount is also pointless as you need to include 223s.
Point is, keep it as simple as possible.
2nd point. Actually scrutineer the guns. There is a popular 22lr series in the north island with a hunter class and there is some piss taking going on because they do not scrutineer the rifles and grumbling from the rest of the class that are sticking to the rules because of it.

3rd, design the course of fire to encourage a certain type of rifle. For example, you could make it clear there will be some closer unsupported targets as well as longer stuff.

Maybe run an open class for the gamers so they can play too.

Greetings all,

The Wilkinson deer targets can be a pain to maintain. Our NZDA branch shot the Wilkinson from the 1970's until 1999. Over much of that time I maintained the targets and built (from memory) 3 new sets. The MkIII in the photo has two small blocks of wood fixed to the target outside the scoring area and the plastic scoring plate sits on these with the outer edges of the plate flush with the outer edges of the blocks. The deer target has the neck length reduced to fit on a 1.300m by 1.200m target face. The target face is 3mm MDF in three sections with the middle 500mm containing the deer body so it can be easily replaced. The deer is positioned on the target face using the centre hole in the scoring plate positioned on the blocks to keep everything the same. This has all taken some extra work in building the targets but reduces the ongoing maintenance considerably. Happy to provide more detail if needed.
Regards Grandpamac.

PS. The target is actually a MkII improved but the comments mostly apply.

It appears that there are 2 different discussions going on -


1. a "hunter class" to allow participants to be competitive in a competition where that equipment is likely to fare poorly against more specialised gear

and

2. hunter "competitions" that propose to simulate and test shooting skills geared towards certain "more real" hunting scenarios

You are not limited to one class. Our local NRA shoots a number of classes on the same range and in the same detail. Perhaps start with a couple of classes aimed at beginner and more advanced. Let attendance guide your progress. Currently hunters fall into 3 overlapping groups. The bush hobbits, the open country stalkers and the long rangers. There should be something for everyone.
GPM.

Thanks guys, yes these discussions often develop "tangents" both usefull and otherwise. Ranges are pretty constrained as to what they can offer, ours no exception, it isn't possible for us to do a "hunter challenge" anything remotely like Sparrowhawk's excellent course.

So we have to do something different with what we have. And it has to appeal and cater for as wider range of shooters as possible - that's our ethos at Invercargill Rifle Club. What I've programmed is aimed at guys who hunt but want to shoot past 300M AND target shooters. Wether they come with a hunting rifle or a target rifle I want them to feel like they can "belong". We'll see how it goes.