Different 100y target and why we need it

[thomasair]

Here is a different 100y target I just shot in almost calm conditions.

The purpose of creating a new target is to remove the chance factor that comes with the 10 and X ring being smaller than the repeatable capability of the equipment. Making an appropriate sized 10 and X means that everyone who make the proper wind call for a shot receives the same highest point value...which is a 10x. As it is with the old target ....2 separate shooters with equal equipment can do everything correct and receive different scores.

The second purpose is to change the ring graduations beyond the 10 so there is a finer scale to separate shooters who are very close.

I tried to make it the same center locations as Mike B’s target so I could mark the holes shot through the new one into it and score it too for comparison.

They were both scored with a .350 plug. The xs were determined by getting the entire plug inside the 10.


The notable changes are that the 10 ring is 1”, and each successive ring is 1/2”’larger. There is almost one full ring more in the same size. This produces a finer scale to grade beyond the 10. It may be even better for sorting out the top guys if the ring spacing was finer yet. Maybe 3/8” per ring instead of 1/2”?

Mike

 

[tommyb]

Here is a different 100y target I just shot in almost calm conditions.

I tried to make it the same center locations as Mike B’s target so I could mark the holes shot through the new one into it and score it too for comparison.

They were both scored with a .350 plug. The xs were determined by getting the entire plug inside the 10.


The notable changes are that the 10 ring is 1”, and each successive ring is 1/2”’larger. There is almost one full ring more in the same size. This produces a finer scale to grade beyond the 10. It may be even better for sorting out the top guys if the ring spacing was finer yet. Maybe 3/8” per ring instead of 1/2”?

Mike

This is a good illustration / comparison showing the effects of having a larger 10 ring and larger rings. Q. If you used this illustration and set up a polling thread to capture votes for old vs proposed size change, could those results be used to persuade the sanctioning bodes of the various EBR matches to consider implementing the change?

Tom

 

[AirSupply]

Makes a lot of senses

 

[brink]

I like that but would like to see a .5 inch X ring thinking it would be easier to score for those of us that do not have a .35 plug. And like the idea of 3/8 inch ring increase as opposed to .5 thinking that it would help sorting out some scores, maybe get another ring scoring out to 5 more like the USARBR targets. My 2 cents anyway!

 

[thomasair]

Hi Tommy...thanks for the feedback. It’s important to understand that there is no organization or sanctioning body for 100y air rifle shooting. The EBR is run by AOA (now Daystate), the Utah event is run by Utah Airguns (FX), and Pyramyd is what it is. The targets used at each event are not the same. The formats for the matches are not the same. The matches are promotional events for their respective manufacturers. There are very few 100y matches taking place in our country at the club level.

I will make up a target with 3/8” spacing on the successive rings and see how that fares. I think it is probably the way to go. I can add a X ring. I will not make the X small because that would defeat some of the purpose of changing the target since the X is actually the highest score attainable. I’ll probably make the X .75”.

It should be understood that you need to score targets shot with multiple calibers with a plug of the largest caliber, so the target must be designed for a plug at first. After you are happy with a target, you can make caliber specific targets for comparative use without a plug. I heard a seriously weak argument that describes the use of a plug to score a target as work. It is actually much easier to score a target accurately using a plug. Most holes will not need a plug once your eyes get used to seeing the targets. The plug will only be necessary for close shots...and at that point it’s faster than trying to make a decision on a tattered hole. The plug makes the scoring edge perfect so there is far less room for interpretation.

Mike

 

[thomasair]

I added a few paragraphs and changed the title of the post to be more clear.

Mike 

 

[thomasair]

Here is another practice version if anyone wants to try.

View attachment 1594424089_14939969695f08fb19755eb8.21132584.pdf

 

[Smok3y]

...

Nevermind, must be my printer. All my targets with color printed fine. I just tried one other target that was also, BW only, and it did the same thing. Must be my ink levels or something. I'll come back when I get it working. 

 

[sigp220]

Wouldn't you know it shot 2 cards of your original design and you switched it up. 

Like many I have been following along and learning. Great discussions going on. 

As far as an organization I thought the ASA group was trying to standardize the target with the one listed on their website?

 

[thomasair]

I’m just trying to figure out what works. The old and new are not much different. Just the X ring.

They may be trying to standardize a target, but it has the same trouble as the others.

There will likely never be any agreement between the 2 manufacturers. Neither will give any ground to the other.


Mike

 

[thomasair]

Here are 4 targets just shot. 2 of mine and 2 of the EBR. I did not plug either.

 

[thomasair]

FYI...between the two cards I drew up...I scored the one with the bigger x ring as an x if the pellet was completely inside the ring. The most recent one just has the x ring smaller to conventionally inward score. It’s almost exactly the same functionally ...but people like it better because it looks more normal.

Post them up and let me know your opinion.

It’s easier to get a 10...but you get penalized more once outside the 10.

Mike. 

 

[nomojo65]

I like the second incarnation, (yours) it looks more like a Usarb Target to me anyway? But I really have no iron in the fire Here! 

 

[thomasair]

My only purpose of trying to create a better target is because I will hopefully get to put the Nationals on next year if this virus thing is under control. I want to see the fairest game possible. There will be no qualifying, Everyone will shoot 3 cards, and move down 1/3 of the range for each target shot. If there are multiple relays, everyone will shoot one card before anyone shoots a 2nd. It will follow the world rules for match operation....which were designed to create as much fairness as can be provided.

Mike

 

[Centercut]

For the Nationals I think 1" is a pretty good size for the ten ring, but I'm sure that's debatable among all of us. I think that gets near state of the art, although I'd need to work the math backwards from you apparent 237 or so average in ideal conditions... It could be 0.8", and as technology improves it will move in that direction. It would not surprise me at all if scores went down, not up with the 1" bullseye depending on real world conditions since the other rings are closer together and therefore smaller diameter. Yes, in mild easy conditions the scores will go up, but that's not normally the case in New Mexico...

The EBR, RMAC, and PAC targets won't be changed I'm pretty sure on that one. RMAC and PAC follow the same rules. Targets between all three are almost identical with EBR being ever so slightly smaller.

The part I don't really agree on (but I'll still shoot the Nationals regardless) is the X ring size. I'm not certain that other shooting sports have the X ring where the state of the art in ideal conditions can get all Xs (reference 50Y BR target) or if it even needs to be. So if I were King for a Day, I'd make the X ring about 1/2 inch, or about the same size as the EBR ten ring, which is double the state of the art grouping at 50 yards.

 

[Beginner]

I like your target with the +. the other target looks like a 50 year old prone target and not one created for, 

or relevant to the 100 yard br air rifle shooting of today



jeff

 

[thomasair]

Bear in mind these are just ideas that I’m putting on paper. Nothing is final for me yet in deciding how the Nationals targets will be.


Mike...the latest iteration had a .625” X ring. I just didn’t post it yet.

The other thing to keep in mind is that the current 100y targets actually favor exceptional guns. Going to a larger 10 ring will not favor them as much.

I agree that many may shoot lower scores since the rings beyond the 10 are smaller.

The whole idea is to remove as much chance as possible and more finely sort the field.


Mike 

 

[CampFussell]

My vote is in for the 0.625" x ring. Funny thing is I had that number in my mind a day or two before you posted the new target with it. Had even mentioned it in a comment but edited it out before I posted the comment.

 

[Centercut]

Seems close. 1 inch ten ring is 0.785 square inches. 0.625 X ring is 0.307 square inches, so the X ring is about 40% as large as the ten ring... How does that compare to other BR disciplines?

 

[Beginner]

You should not really try to compare it to the other br targets

group sizes vary with conditions in the other disciplines and so just try to design it with

the parameters of this sport, you will get a better result