[Sticky] Palmyra LRFT 11/1/2025 Match Results

GREAT Shoot!

Thanks to Brian, Mike, Rod, David and anyone I forgot for setting up a challenging course.

Thanks to all the friends that joined in the fun and then helped taking out the course to leave the range clean.

Just TWO suggestions:

1.- And, perhaps, this is my fault because I am new to this game and I have not perfected my "setup ritual" as much as I have polished my normal FT routine of "plop down and shoot".
I am still clumsy about getting setup, sitting, and getting into the shooting position.
Another aspect is that the rifles used are, MOSTLY, longer than a normal FT rifle, so there is a lot of barrel swinging all over the place.
So, the suggestion is as follows: Set up the lanes with ONE lane in between them. Gives us newbies (and those with longer barrels) more space, LOL! 

2.- 42 shots feels a bit "short" to drive two hours there and back. It also fails to test the efficiency of the modern HP PCP. Not that people can not "re-air" in the middle of the match, there are no time constraints anyway. I THINK, it just adds a bit more of a challenge.

A comment was made about "entry level" and I think there were two understandings of that:
One friend was talking about the layout/setup of the course, and another was talking about the equipment.
It was sort of funny because both friends walked away with a ¿? face.

In any case, after careful thought about both sides of the question I have to say that the most "entry level setup" in the lineup was my Avenge X with an old AEON scope (about $750 total), and I would consider that setup capable of really good scores once the wind and the trajectory has been mastered.
As far as the layout, I don't think you can really have an "entry level layout" that covers all the distances between 15 and 106 yards.
Even an experienced varmint hunter would have troubles scoring more than 30% in a course like this. The limitations imposed by the wind, the light changes, the range and the pellet (no slugs allowed), make it for a very challenging game.

My way of "scaling" the airgun games relies on the external ballistics of the situation:

Example 1.- Shooting at 12 ft-lbs an 8,44 pellet at a 1½" KZ in a FT is ballistically equivalent to shooting the 145 grs. 7.62 NATO service cartridge at a cantaloupe sized target at 350 yds.
Same ToF (Time of Flight), same DfH (Drop from Horizontal), same WD (Wind Drift).

Example 2. (my case).- Shooting a 25 grs, 22 cal pellet at 50 ft-lbs is ballistically equivalent of shooting the US Army Sniper load (177 grs. Sierra Match King @ 2,600 fps)  at the proverbial cantaloupe at 295 yards.  ToF: 0.4 seconds, DfH: 27½", WD.- 5"

Not an easy shot by any standards.

It's peculiar that the sub-12 ft-lbs/55 yards situation is harder than the 50 ft-lbs/100 yards situation, but it is probably due to the difference in designs of the pellets, the heavier ones approaching more the "cylindrical projectiles" that are the bases for most ballistics.

Anyway, thanks for reading, and thanks for the shoot, utterly enjoyable.

For those that have been "on the line" about participating in one of these shoots:

"Jump the fence"!
It's still FT, it does require form and technique, and it's just another way of enjoying the natural-to-FT camaraderie and good times.

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM

@hector_j_medina_g Hector, I too would like more targets to shoot as well, say a full 60? We have the room, I’ll see what the powers in charge think. 

bwags

@bwags Me too. My drive to the match was > 2 hours and 42 shots felt like ending short; I definitely would enjoy a longer match if the targets were available to support this, and the range layout allowed this. My first LRFT experience, and a lot to learn. Thanks to Brian, Mike, Rod, and David for setting up the course.

@bwags 

I would love a 60 shot match, though that would mean "taking out" the sighting in section (that is not impossible and would take about 5 minutes with everybody helping) prior to starting the match, to allow for one lane for every two "numbered positions" in the range.

Still another idea would be to have "sight in lanes" interspersed with the FT lanes, and use quadrant spinners instead of paper.
3 distances for every "sight in lane" would allow covering the whole range of necessary distances in the 10 lanes allotted to that purpose.
I understand that quadrant spinners are more expensive than target holders, but in the long run they will be cheaper to keep, as the only thing they need is paint.
This would also distribute the sight in process over more targets and would allow people to shoot more "test shots".
Setting up spinners at : 15, 25, 35, 45, 55, 65, 75, 85, 95, and 105 would cover all needs, so over 10 lanes @ 3 spinners per lane, we could repeat the whole series 3 times.
The DoAll is costing now between $38 and $49, there is a cheaper alternative, but it is not as well made. The DoAll has a 2" Bullseye, the cheaper alternative has a 3" one.
I'm sure we can get some special price if we get a bunch, OR, to make it a self sustaining project, we could get 50 or more made and then sell the ones the Club will not use.
The design is simple and the trick is the precision of the "kerf" between sections. To hold that "kerf" small, the welding needs to be very well jigged.
Once the sighting-in time was done, we would just need to remove the distance markers (IF we wanted, as the rangeing is not AS important as in traditional FT) to proceed with the shoot itself.

We can also distribute the paper holders if people were adamant on sighting in with paper. I just dislike the idea of so much trash after the match.

Anyway, Kudos for a great first season!

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM