Excerpt from "Speaking Frankly", by the late Frank Marshall.
If we can attract new blood and get them hooked in the pleasures of our sport before we scare them off, CBA will grow. Of course, some of these new shooters will aspire to better things and will probably upgrade to Hunter, Benchrest, or Open class rifles. That's the nature of the game. BUT, we shouldn't scare off the new blood with all our expensive technology before we get them hooked. You have to win a few bucks with your own hot rod Chevy before you go build an Indy racer, and it's the same with shooting competition.
Let's give the little guys a chance to come join us, we might find there's another C.W. Rowland or Elmer Schook out there if we don't scare them off Keep it simple, or else we'll kill it.
IS CBA MISSING THE BOAT?
The pursuit of happiness through cast bullet accuracy gets boring, once I prove a point, but the quest for better woods and field loads is a continually consuming interest. There is much more we must consider objectively towards getting the optimum hunting loads, and the results will be every bit as satisfying as the sub-moa group in competition.
The proof of hunting loads is almost always uncertain, when compared to the winner's circle at the CBA jousting grounds. But to woods seasoned observers of many years cumulative ridge running, a proper combination is spotted immediately and treasured with all the sincerity of the magic target load. It is only on the basis that a top hunting cast load can be judged; as a comparative analysis which considers strict requirements for success, which are unique to the hunting load. The quality of cast load shooting is such that a super target load capable of m.o.a. accuracy greatly prized by the benchrest bug, may be worthless as spigots on a big buck on the eastern slopes of the Blue Ridge, a scant few miles west of the shady shooting benches of Fairfax Rod & Gun Club.
The development of the ultimate cast bullet hunting load was rather devoid of attention, until very recently, when I succeeded in convincing Ed Harris, and through him, Dennis Marshall, that we must not let hunting load development lay fallow while we pursue the ultimate accuracy. While in the jacketed shooting game, thousands of rounds are fired on paper for every one shot a field at game, the majority of our CBA members appear to be as interested in hunting as in competition. I feel the real satisfaction with cast bullets is to be had using them in preference to jacketed bullets for hunting as well as casual target shooting. It is entirely practical to do this, given knowledge of the basic requirements. This research of Ed's and Dennis's has re-invented the wheel, in one sense, but I am pleased to see that what I have learned through experience is entirely supported by scientific investigation.
Getting back to my original premise, that of giving hunting load and hunting rifle development with cast bullets equal status with pure accuracy shooting in benchrest style rifles, I'd like to throw out my comments regarding the production rifle class Andy Barniskis proposed in newsletter 23. As hunting rifles go, an off the rack sporter with a scope not more than 4X, using fixed cartridges suitable for feeding through the magazine, as they would be in actual hunting situations, is the most realistic approach. In keeping with true field conditions, I'd like to see such a match conducted using an off the rack rifle, real hunting sights, fixed ammo fed through the magazine, and (the crowning touch) with no sighting shots. A big buck gives you no sighters when he breaks for the tall timber either.
Nobody runs the ridges with a 10 lb. CBA style "HUNTER"??? rifle with 24X scope, wide flatbottomed forend, and ammo which is 2" too long to fit into the magazine. Those aren't hunting rifles or hunting loads, so why call them "hunter" rifles? "Light varmint" would be a more accurate term.
Andy's suggestion for a production class is admirable, and I hope it catches on. I would like to see this as regular shoulder-to-shoulder record category, perhaps even with it being possible for custom barreled rifles to be used, provided they were honest-to-Pete hunting rifles, no con-game rule bending stuff If this were to be permitted, the rules should be strict on that point. I'd suggest a minimum barrel length of 18", a maximum muzzle diameter of .70", and maximum fore-end width of 2" from the front of the receiver ring to the fore-end tip. This would permit any factory hunting rifle and honest sporters, but would exclude the silhouette rifles, which are not hunting rifles in the real sense. If you couldn't expect to see a guy in the woods hunting with such a rifle, it should not be permitted. Period.
I feel that sophistication beyond reality has cooled off many a shooting game. It killed smallbore and NRA-style high power rifle shooting, and it is happening to both the rilfe and pistol silhouette games. Introduction of the CBA production class could save CBA from the big money equipment race which has developed at Wapwallopen over the last few years. The production class could be the best thing that ever happened to promote the growth of CBA. Each year we've had a few new shooters show up at Wapwallopen with hunting rifles, who did well, considering their equipment. Some, like Dave Finch and Dick Oden did very well, in fact, with standard hunting rifles. However, many an aspiring competitor has been frustrated by seeing his ordinary rifle, good as it is, being entirely outclassed by a benchrest rifle which was chopped down to make the weight limit. If he doesn't spend the bucks, he won't be competitive against that kind of rifle, so we have just lost that shooter as a potential competitor and contributing member. We should have a program which will encourage accuracy development and expertise with the hunting rifles everybody owns, if we are to survive. Specialization will otherwise kill the Golden Goose. The pursuit of happiness through cast bullet accuracy gets boring, once I prove a point, but the quest for better woods and field loads is a continually consuming interest. There is much more we must consider objectively towards getting the optimum hunting loads, and the results will be every bit as satisfying as the sub-moa group in competition.
The proof of hunting loads is almost always uncertain, when compared to the winner's circle at the CBA jousting grounds. But to woods seasoned observers of many years cumulative ridge running, a proper combination is spotted immediately and treasured with all the sincerity of the magic target load. It is only on the basis that a top hunting cast load can be judged; as a comparative analysis which considers strict requirements for success, which are unique to the hunting load. The quality of cast load shooting is such that a super target load capable of m.o.a. accuracy greatly prized by the benchrest bug, may be worthless as spigots on a big buck on the eastern slopes of the Blue Ridge, a scant few miles west of the shady shooting benches of Fairfax Rod & Gun Club.
The development of the ultimate cast bullet hunting load was rather devoid of attention, until very recently, when I succeeded in convincing Ed Harris, and through him, Dennis Marshall, that we must not let hunting load development lay fallow while we pursue the ultimate accuracy. While in the jacketed shooting game, thousands of rounds are fired on paper for every one shot a field at game, the majority of our CBA members appear to be as interested in hunting as in competition. I feel the real satisfaction with cast bullets is to be had using them in preference to jacketed bullets for hunting as well as casual target shooting. It is entirely practical to do this, given knowledge of the basic requirements. This research of Ed's and Dennis's has re-invented the wheel, in one sense, but I am pleased to see that what I have learned through experience is entirely supported by scientific investigation.
Getting back to my original premise, that of giving hunting load and hunting rifle development with cast bullets equal status with pure accuracy shooting in benchrest style rifles, I'd like to throw out my comments regarding the production rifle class Andy Barniskis proposed in newsletter 23. As hunting rifles go, an off the rack sporter with a scope not more than 4X, using fixed cartridges suitable for feeding through the magazine, as they would be in actual hunting situations, is the most realistic approach. In keeping with true field conditions, I'd like to see such a match conducted using an off the rack rifle, real hunting sights, fixed ammo fed through the magazine, and (the crowning touch) with no sighting shots. A big buck gives you no sighters when he breaks for the tall timber either.
Nobody runs the ridges with a 10 lb. CBA style "HUNTER"??? rifle with 24X scope, wide flatbottomed forend, and ammo which is 2" too long to fit into the magazine. Those aren't hunting rifles or hunting loads, so why call them "hunter" rifles? "Light varmint" would be a more accurate term.
Andy's suggestion for a production class is admirable, and I hope it catches on. I would like to see this as regular shoulder-to-shoulder record category, perhaps even with it being possible for custom barreled rifles to be used, provided they were honest-to-Pete hunting rifles, no con-game rule bending stuff If this were to be permitted, the rules should be strict on that point. I'd suggest a minimum barrel length of 18", a maximum muzzle diameter of .70", and maximum fore-end width of 2" from the front of the receiver ring to the fore-end tip. This would permit any factory hunting rifle and honest sporters, but would exclude the silhouette rifles, which are not hunting rifles in the real sense. If you couldn't expect to see a guy in the woods hunting with such a rifle, it should not be permitted. Period.
If we can attract new blood and get them hooked in the pleasures of our sport before we scare them off, CBA will grow. Of course, some of these new shooters will aspire to better things and will probably upgrade to Hunter, Benchrest, or Open class rifles. That's the nature of the game. BUT, we shouldn't scare off the new blood with all our expensive technology before we get them hooked. You have to win a few bucks with your own hot rod Chevy before you go build an Indy racer, and it's the same with shooting competition.
Let's give the little guys a chance to come join us, we might find there's another C.W. Rowland or Elmer Schook out there if we don't scare them off Keep it simple, or else we'll kill it.