M14 Forum

jameydan · November 4th, 2011, 09:46 PM

There is a poll over at nationalmatch.us that will be presented to the NRA high power committee regarding shortening the rapid fire times. This was apparently brought up at the NRA competitor meeting in Camp Perry and it will be brought up again at the next committee meeting.

I think this is a horible idea on several fronts, including the ramifications to us 7.62 and 30 cal shooters. But, I am not going to rehash all the issues here. Read about them at the poll posting.

If you are concerned go over to nationalmatch.us and vote. If you are not a registered user you will need to sign up (free): http://www.usrifleteams.com/forums/

The poll is here: http://www.usrifleteams.com/forums/i...howtopic=19967

Xsail · November 4th, 2011, 10:31 PM

What's the challenge question to sign up? They want to change it from what to what?...O.L.

Bamban · November 5th, 2011, 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jameydan

There is a poll over at nationalmatch.us that will be presented to the NRA high power committee regarding shortening the rapid fire times. This was apparently brought up at the NRA competitor meeting in Camp Perry and it will be brought up again at the next committee meeting.

I think this is a horible idea on several fronts, including the ramifications to us 7.62 and 30 cal shooters. But, I am not going to rehash all the issues here. Read about them at the poll posting.

If you are concerned go over to nationalmatch.us and vote. If you are not a registered user you will need to sign up (free): http://www.usrifleteams.com/forums/

The poll is here: http://www.usrifleteams.com/forums/i...howtopic=19967

I saw it when it got started and took the poll, which shows a resounding NO.

jameydan · November 5th, 2011, 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bamban

I saw it when it got started and took the poll, which shows a resounding NO.

Lets make sure that it becomes an even more resounding NO! I wish they would focus on other issues that are actual problems.

Xsail: It has not been stated what the change would be from the 60 and 70 sec limits.

JW

Bamban · November 5th, 2011, 08:03 AM

JW,

Who is behind this? Is this AMU driven thing, do you think?

nez

KYShooter · November 6th, 2011, 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bamban

JW,

Who is behind this? Is this AMU driven thing, do you think?

nez

From Emil Praslick's (Captain of the AMU team and member of the HP committee) posts, I don't think he's too hip for this idea. Besides, as many pointed out in the posts there, there is enough inconsistency between the NRA and CMP on rapid fire rules that nobody seems really interested in adding more inconsistency.

Shooters seem to have pretty much adapted to the differences in standing vs. sitting but to change the cadence of fire between the two organizations would be ludricrous.

82nd ABN · November 6th, 2011, 12:05 PM

That would flat out suck! Correct me if I am wrong. In the league I am in, we shoot the standing rapids at 60 seconds and I found out today that we shoot the prone rapids in 70 seconds. Now I never timed it and this is what the dude laying down next to me replied to a question form the dude laying down next to him. I always thought the prone rapids were 60 seconds also. I just got my timing down too. I am usually squeezing off the last round and the target drops.

30Caliber · November 6th, 2011, 01:45 PM

If we have to start in position, then I've got no gripes with less time. Scores are usually pretty damned high in the rapids. I'd rather they spend some time and find a way to get the CMP and NRA rules back in synch.

beerman · November 22nd, 2011, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 82nd ABN

That would flat out suck! Correct me if I am wrong. In the league I am in, we shoot the standing rapids at 60 seconds and I found out today that we shoot the prone rapids in 70 seconds. Now I never timed it and this is what the dude laying down next to me replied to a question form the dude laying down next to him. I always thought the prone rapids were 60 seconds also. I just got my timing down too. I am usually squeezing off the last round and the target drops.

I am sure you really mean the "rapid sitting" and not "rapid standing"

Xsail · November 23rd, 2011, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 30Caliber

If we have to start in position, then I've got no gripes with less time. Scores are usually pretty damned high in the rapids. I'd rather they spend some time and find a way to get the CMP and NRA rules back in synch.

If the scores are high in rapids, that tells me it isn't hard enough. :)....O.L.

Bamban · November 23rd, 2011, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 30Caliber

If we have to start in position, then I've got no gripes with less time. Scores are usually pretty damned high in the rapids. I'd rather they spend some time and find a way to get the CMP and NRA rules back in synch.

I agree on the synchronizing the two.

On the scores, I have not seen 10X Clean as par for the course.

TCAF · November 23rd, 2011, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bamban

I agree on the synchronizing the two.

On the scores, I have not seen 10X Clean as par for the course.

+1 to both. It's a pain to have a different set of rules between the CMP and NRA on the standing issue. I personally like the way the CMP does it better. If able, I think one needs to stand. The times aren't the problem, IMHO.

willriskit · November 23rd, 2011, 07:29 AM

Perhaps this is part of a trend. At our last Marine Corps League postal rifle match (cold, left to right 30 mph wind gusts) we were restricted to having no more than two rounds per clip in each volley from the time we signed-up months before. Since the majority of us were shooting Garands, M-14's and AR's, this struck me as odd and given the capability of our rifles, it was needlessly tedious and everyone's scores suffered as a consequence. Any thoughts?