I believe you'll find I've spoken in support of the M5, but the no practice, no fouling parts are IMO ridiculous. Nothing in the rules was specifically spelled out, such as IIRC the last match flyer still stated 10 shots at each distance, which ended up being 5 at each distance. However that was for the May match (trial) which worked itself into June's Nationals, where 5 were indicated. There was no explanation concerning no practice and no fouling, which I and many others suspected meant no practice shooting at the target before shooting for score
. Such as the 50yd and 100yd targets, where you can shoot as many practice shots as time allows, prior to shooting the 5 for score."..M5 match has been posted for a month and no questions - NOT A SINGLE ONE.
Learn how to use a ballistic chart like all us who have no 3, 4 or 500 - no one complained after the match last month. I bet they even work for people who shoot at 3000 feet and 700 feet? Certainly one with a custom rifle is beyond the entry level ML."
There is no serious shooter who is going into a competition using ballistic programs only and having not fired at those ranges. Just like no ethical hunter is going to rely on ballistics charts to shoot at an animal at 500yds, having only been able to practice to 200 or 300yds. For the record, I do know how to use ballistic charts and programs. However, I'm also smart enough to know they can not be solely depended on.
How many times, even on this site and many others, have seasoned shooters told shooters that they must practice at the ranges they intend to shoot? Every seasoned shooter will agree, practice at the ranges you intend to shoot. I don't believe I've ever read where a seasoned shooter recommended relying on ballistics charts/programs only.
I'm supposed to drive 600 miles with the rifle in the back of my truck and have no chance to verify that its still on? I might as well just send a check and stay home.
Now this is hear say, so please clear this up for me. I'm hearing a slightly different story on the May match. I heard, again I heard, as I was not there to witness it, that there were a couple people who did practice prior to the May M5 shoot. Claiming that they didn't have their scope settings. Why didn't they use a ballistics program? If that did happen, which again I'm not saying it did because I wasn't there, was one of those people you?
Now as far as Jeff and/or Doug contesting their targets, I'd have certainly done the same and I certainly support both of them in doing so. There shouldn't have been an issue in the scoring room, as one would hope those persons who do the scoring do it professionally and accurately every time. Its also my understanding that others may have shot the same previously?
The IH........ well its not simple, as evident by the multitude of shooters who are ticked off about it. There's no consistency, double standards and no written defined statement concerning "PRODUCTION". At best, its a guess by someone assuming control. One rifle is illegal, where another same rifle is legal. Say the Rem70ml (example only). The production rifle shot a #11 cap, but a change to the bolt face and BP may be legal. However, take the cheap plastic stock off it and replace it to fit the shooter and its now considered a custom? The Cooper rifle is considered a custom rifle, so said Joe. Is it still considered a custom? How about the Ultimate rifles.... The BP Express is considered a custom rifle, yet the nearly identical Remington Ultimate is considered production? Lets look at the two rifles closely. Both use the identical actions, both use higher quality stocks, where the Rem. B&C (IIRC), comes with pillars, whereas the BP Xpress does not have pillars. Both rifles use custom barrels, the only difference is that UF uses a Lothar Walther barrel and Remington makes their own custom barrels. Speaking of barrels on those rifles, did you know that some of the earliest Remington Ultimate rifles had Lothar Walther barrels? Remington had the ability to make their own custom barrels, which saved them costs. But rest assured, the Remington barrel is a custom barrel. Then Remington IMPROVED their rifle over the BP Xpress, by changing the hardness of the BP, making it removable. Contrary to popular belief, neither the BP Xpress or the Remington ULM are custom target or competition rifles. They are both hunting rifles.
Now I've heard, again heard, that at one time the rule was there had to be at least 1,000 rifles made in a year for a rifle to be considered a production rifle (same model). If that's the case, then the UF BP Xpress would be a production rifle. Its just built in the owner's basement, each identical, vs the Remington built in a factory. Both have model numbers. They are both built as hunting rifles and not for competition.
Shooters are not happy with the changes and decisions made in and to the IH class. I had another very well respected shooter, who you know but will remain anonymous, send me a private message last week and asked if I knew anyone wanting to buy an $800 paper weight. They refuse to shoot the IH class with the changes. Another shooter lost to constant changes.
As far as the BH209 issue and its possibility of not being allowed in the September Nationals. First, I heard this from two very respectable shooters who were present when the statement was made, presumably by Joe Hill. I was told this the day after the May match by both. Now, neither of those two highly respected shooters are members of this site and that said, I'll not be giving you their names. You don't need their names, nor do their names require mentioning. If that means that your of the opinion that I'm not telling the truth about it, well believe what you like.
Now as far as FB, which you admit you don't use. When these changes to the IH class first appeared, I WAS NOT the first to question the loss of bench use for the 200m and 300m silhouettes, or the last. Others clearly beat me to it. Would you be disappointed in them also? Questions were asked, there wasn't any heated arguments. But when it comes to dictators, when you question them there are always ramifications. Quite frankly, when I asked on the Nmlr FB site, I used the words "VERY RESPECTFULLY", when I questioned the loss of the benches. That is when Joe Hill removed my questions and bared me from further comment. However, directly after that, another asked the same question!
The remaining quote still exists: "Nmlra (National Muzzle Loading Rifle Association) Joe Hill here, we've been shooting Silhouettes at friendship since 1990 and there has never been benches on that line until the inline match started. As far as how people are shooting in other places, it doesn't really pertain to us. Shooting from cross sticks is popular with Hunters. The rule also says that youth and seniors can still use benches.
May 24 at 3:21pm · Edited" The reason it says "edited", is because my questions were deleted. https://www.facebook.com/NMLRA/
I'm in no way bashing the NMLRA, on the contrary I'm questioning the modern inline rule changes, as are many others. As dues paying members, we have that right. If I have concerns, I'm going to voice them and its all been very much within reason. This disappoints you? I guess it might, as you do admit responsibility or some part of it.
Personally, I'd like to see this whole mess straightened out once and for all. I'd just love to see Jeff and Greg handle it.
Shooting at Friendship is extremely enjoyable, but the constant rule changes deter people. However I will question and not just end up being an "un-thinking follower.
‘Leadership means: Choosing the right objective, the best way to reach it, and inspiring others to join you. Given that definition, the opposite would be: Choosing the wrong objective (or no objective, just drifting), applying ineffective or immoral means to achieving it, and disengaging others (or attracting only unthinking-followers).
A "thinking follower" chooses to engage with others in achievement of a vision. Assuming they judge it to be a worthy vision and they mean to add value.
On the other hand, there's many an "unthinking-follower". They hitch their wagon to another's vision uncritically, have no idea what or how their own values are being served, and add little or no value. They are baggage, and are at the mercy of whomever they choose to follow on faith.’