Pre-PCP FT scores--a question

Pre-PCP FT scores--a question

Joined: December 17th, 2009, 1:03 am

November 10th, 2011, 4:16 am #1

In the days when the HW77 ruled the roost, before PCPs, were the scores any less than now? Was nobody shooting one or two less than perfect? Were the top scores only 75% of the total available? I find this hard to believe. So what changed? Why aren't springers doing as well as the PCPs now? Are the courses being designed harder now because of the accuracy potential of the PCPs? If so, harder how? Smaller KZs at longer distances? I really am not quite sure why springers don't fare as well against PCPs. Are you expecting me to believe that 1" at 50 yards is suddenly out of reach for a springer because PCPs are here? Can nobody hit that with a springer now?

And if this is true, will the new proposed "Springer" class be an easier course than the open?

I know I'm like a child asking Eienstien about physics here so just pat me on the head and ruffle my hair and say, "Well son, its like this....." but I need an education here.

And what is PFT? Pistol Field Target?

Appel
Reply
Share

Joined: April 12th, 2006, 7:56 am

November 10th, 2011, 7:39 am #2

First, the modern underlever spring guns didn't appear until the early 20th century. Precharged pnuematics date back to the late 15th/ early 16th century. They were quite popular with the European nobility as hunting arms.

Precharged pneumatic air rifles have around in FT from almost the start. They just weren't common. Most of the American FT guys were shooting the guns they were most familiar with, British and Germans spring guns that had a much finer trigger, the Rekord design, than their contemporary PCP airgun whose technological refinement was in its infancy. Once PCP's gained a similar level of refinement and reliability as springers, they became more common. Some folks who shoot spring guns still argue the reliabilty point.

Spring guns are every bit as accurate as PCP guns! It's just much harder for the average shooter to shoot a springer as consistently accurate as he/she can a PCP airgun. I've been shooting FT since '96 and when I switched to PCP airguns in 2000, My scores improved only slightly, mostly I feel because I had a much better scope(Bushnell 4200 32x) than I had on my ProSport(Simmons 44Mag 20x) Both were capable of shooting about 1/2" groups at 50 yards. I could shoot a 1" kill zone target at 50 yards 6x out of 10 with a .25 cal BSA Superstar back then. 8x of 10 with a ProSport about the same with my S-400.

There are plenty of spring gun shooters today who can hit 1" kill zone at 50 yards. Most of the top spring gun shooters from the '90's moved to PCP's as it became apparent how much easier it was to shoot PCP's as accurately with greater consistentcy. When Leo Duran or Roz Sumter are having a good day shooting springers, they impress the heck out of all the top PCP guys who without exception remember how difficult it was physically to shoot a springer for 60 shot match with consistency. Normal club matches were about 40 shots back them and I would be pretty beat after 40.

PFT = pistol field target, HFT = Hunter.

Last edited by crgintx on November 10th, 2011, 10:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reply
Share

Joined: December 17th, 2009, 1:03 am

November 10th, 2011, 12:52 pm #3

In the days when the HW77 ruled the roost, before PCPs, were the scores any less than now? Was nobody shooting one or two less than perfect? Were the top scores only 75% of the total available? I find this hard to believe. So what changed? Why aren't springers doing as well as the PCPs now? Are the courses being designed harder now because of the accuracy potential of the PCPs? If so, harder how? Smaller KZs at longer distances? I really am not quite sure why springers don't fare as well against PCPs. Are you expecting me to believe that 1" at 50 yards is suddenly out of reach for a springer because PCPs are here? Can nobody hit that with a springer now?

And if this is true, will the new proposed "Springer" class be an easier course than the open?

I know I'm like a child asking Eienstien about physics here so just pat me on the head and ruffle my hair and say, "Well son, its like this....." but I need an education here.

And what is PFT? Pistol Field Target?

Appel
Thank you, Carlos n/t
Reply
Share

Joined: September 28th, 2000, 12:50 am

November 10th, 2011, 4:41 pm #4

In the days when the HW77 ruled the roost, before PCPs, were the scores any less than now? Was nobody shooting one or two less than perfect? Were the top scores only 75% of the total available? I find this hard to believe. So what changed? Why aren't springers doing as well as the PCPs now? Are the courses being designed harder now because of the accuracy potential of the PCPs? If so, harder how? Smaller KZs at longer distances? I really am not quite sure why springers don't fare as well against PCPs. Are you expecting me to believe that 1" at 50 yards is suddenly out of reach for a springer because PCPs are here? Can nobody hit that with a springer now?

And if this is true, will the new proposed "Springer" class be an easier course than the open?

I know I'm like a child asking Eienstien about physics here so just pat me on the head and ruffle my hair and say, "Well son, its like this....." but I need an education here.

And what is PFT? Pistol Field Target?

Appel
the shooter population in spring gun has thinned and aged.

go to:

http://aafta.org/menu_history.html

and see all the results for Nationals from 2003 to 2011.

You will note that BTDR's for National Matches have been pretty constant over these last 8 years (around 33-36)

You will also note that some good shooters moved to PCP and then WFTF PCP.

Perhaps 2003 was a banner year, because the top piston score was 97/120, while the more modern piston scores have gravitated towards the high, upper 80's.

Perhaps there are other conditions I am not aware of, as I did not shoot in those long-ago Matches, but my perception is that Spring gun shooting declined a little over the those years.

Hitting a 1" KZ at 50 yards on your turf is much easier than doing it at a Match.

There are a LOT of other factors involved. Travelling being a very important one.

Keep at this game, you will soon find there is a reason to all this madness.





Un Abrazo!




H�ctor
Reply
Share

Joined: November 4th, 2004, 2:28 am

November 10th, 2011, 5:45 pm #5

In the days when the HW77 ruled the roost, before PCPs, were the scores any less than now? Was nobody shooting one or two less than perfect? Were the top scores only 75% of the total available? I find this hard to believe. So what changed? Why aren't springers doing as well as the PCPs now? Are the courses being designed harder now because of the accuracy potential of the PCPs? If so, harder how? Smaller KZs at longer distances? I really am not quite sure why springers don't fare as well against PCPs. Are you expecting me to believe that 1" at 50 yards is suddenly out of reach for a springer because PCPs are here? Can nobody hit that with a springer now?

And if this is true, will the new proposed "Springer" class be an easier course than the open?

I know I'm like a child asking Eienstien about physics here so just pat me on the head and ruffle my hair and say, "Well son, its like this....." but I need an education here.

And what is PFT? Pistol Field Target?

Appel
While a spring guns barrel can shoot just as accurately as a pcp its not quite that simple. here are a few reasons:

-The recoil is considerably more when compared to a pcp. And since the pellet doesn't leave the gun till after the gun is recoiling its a lot more challenging to shoot well.
-The power output of a FT springer is typically at 12fpe so its more "challenging" to shoot.
-Triggers are generally rougher than a 1/2oz pcp trigger.
-Tim McMurray once told me "a spring gun is either broken or breaking". A spring gun is much more mechanically finicky than a pcp and its air valve. For example a spring gun will have a piston seal, a breach seal, a massive spring, spring guides, runny drippy lubes, spring linkages, and piston weight all of which act together before the pellet leaves the barrel. A pcp has a small valve, and a breech seal. More stuff = more issues.
-A spring gun can beat the heck out of your scope, Big Nikko's tend to break after a bit, and even if they dont break right away they get "loose" pretty quick. So you can have more scope issues with a springer. (i've eaten 2 Nikko's and suspect a 3rd is now done)
-As Hector mentioned for some reason they don't tend to travel well. They tend not to shoot the same from venue to venue as Hector mentioned; imo its that a springer continually shifts its zero and you have to find out what its doing today.

Sadly If you look at a big spring gun match its often about who's gun or scope didn't malfunction, the guns for some reason just tend to have issues at the wrong time. In Ky a few years back H Rushton had trigger issues and i snapped a spring. This year Hector's gun wouldn't cock and Tom Perritis scope took a dump etc etc etc. The Pcp's seem to hold together a little better when they're working right. But having said all that a spring gun in the right hands can do very very well.

kevin

Here are a couple of recent west coast matches which a springer did very well. You could also check out the match results for the Diablo group (link in signature) where the springers always do well.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/451309/m ... or+9-10-11

http://www.network54.com/Forum/451309/m ... eles+Range

http://www.network54.com/Forum/451309/m ... ships+2011






<table style="width:auto;"><tr><td></td></tr></table>
http://www.diablofieldtarget.org
Reply
Share

-bp
Joined: June 5th, 2009, 4:21 pm

November 10th, 2011, 7:42 pm #6

although i'm still thinking about a co2 gun

i like the simplicity of not carrying any support gear. if i won or was given a PCP, i honestly would sell it or trade it. to me it's like owning a diesel in a cold climate. too much effort.

i also get a kick (well, literally, too) from shooting a springer. i feel that the R9 i got from nced is about the nicest gun i may ever own, and i'll be quite happy to shoot it forever.

last of all, if i am up against PCPs and i do well with my springer, it just makes my day.

-bp
Reply
Share

lhd
Joined: January 9th, 2002, 2:30 am

November 10th, 2011, 8:07 pm #7

the shooter population in spring gun has thinned and aged.

go to:

http://aafta.org/menu_history.html

and see all the results for Nationals from 2003 to 2011.

You will note that BTDR's for National Matches have been pretty constant over these last 8 years (around 33-36)

You will also note that some good shooters moved to PCP and then WFTF PCP.

Perhaps 2003 was a banner year, because the top piston score was 97/120, while the more modern piston scores have gravitated towards the high, upper 80's.

Perhaps there are other conditions I am not aware of, as I did not shoot in those long-ago Matches, but my perception is that Spring gun shooting declined a little over the those years.

Hitting a 1" KZ at 50 yards on your turf is much easier than doing it at a Match.

There are a LOT of other factors involved. Travelling being a very important one.

Keep at this game, you will soon find there is a reason to all this madness.





Un Abrazo!




H�ctor
2003 was not "long ago". Perhaps '93 is a bit better indicator, though I was using a precharged gun to shoot Ft in '87 ... for even THEN, precharged guns were pretty popular, though at that time, more shooters thought springers were "just as accurate". BTW, until near the turn of this century, there WAS no separate Spring Gun National Champ.

An important reason springers were less accurate was they tended to destroy scopes, so only a few model type were used on them. I could use an inexpensive high mag Tasco on a precharged gun just fine, but a springer usually destroyed one in a week.
Reply
Share

Joined: July 5th, 2010, 6:57 pm

November 11th, 2011, 12:02 am #8

In the days when the HW77 ruled the roost, before PCPs, were the scores any less than now? Was nobody shooting one or two less than perfect? Were the top scores only 75% of the total available? I find this hard to believe. So what changed? Why aren't springers doing as well as the PCPs now? Are the courses being designed harder now because of the accuracy potential of the PCPs? If so, harder how? Smaller KZs at longer distances? I really am not quite sure why springers don't fare as well against PCPs. Are you expecting me to believe that 1" at 50 yards is suddenly out of reach for a springer because PCPs are here? Can nobody hit that with a springer now?

And if this is true, will the new proposed "Springer" class be an easier course than the open?

I know I'm like a child asking Eienstien about physics here so just pat me on the head and ruffle my hair and say, "Well son, its like this....." but I need an education here.

And what is PFT? Pistol Field Target?

Appel
Appel, at the first national match in 1987 there was one PCP which the British national champ Micky Andrews brought over to shoot. In 1988, there were two pcps, one shot by Micky again, one shot by Rodney Boyce. PCPs were not all that common, but by 1989, the numbers were definitely growing. In the beginning you bought a Air Arms or a Daystate, because that's about all there was around, and they had had to be ordered from England. Even as new models came out, it was nothing to wait six months for a gun to show up. Also , you did not have the scopes you have today, a Dick Thomas reworked Leupold 6.5x20 scope, bumped up to 18 to 40 power was considered the primo setup, but again not all that common. As far as kill zone sizes go, I can remember shooting at a 2" zone at 50 yards in the wind in the 1987 match, and that was considered kind of tough. As more PCPs came along the kill zones got progressive smaller, and as it has been mentioned there was no separate class for springers. I got in more than one argument with Rodney, as well as others, that a separate class was needed in order to keep people from leaving the sport. There is no doubt that it is harder to shoot a spring gun, even a tuned one, as they are more sensitive to being held the same way every shot. However, I am in the minority here, I'm sure, in that I enjoy shooting them more than pcps. The main thing is to go out and have fun, because if it ceases being fun, it is not worth doing.Tierney
Reply
Share

Joined: March 30th, 2007, 4:56 am

November 11th, 2011, 7:46 am #9

While a spring guns barrel can shoot just as accurately as a pcp its not quite that simple. here are a few reasons:

-The recoil is considerably more when compared to a pcp. And since the pellet doesn't leave the gun till after the gun is recoiling its a lot more challenging to shoot well.
-The power output of a FT springer is typically at 12fpe so its more "challenging" to shoot.
-Triggers are generally rougher than a 1/2oz pcp trigger.
-Tim McMurray once told me "a spring gun is either broken or breaking". A spring gun is much more mechanically finicky than a pcp and its air valve. For example a spring gun will have a piston seal, a breach seal, a massive spring, spring guides, runny drippy lubes, spring linkages, and piston weight all of which act together before the pellet leaves the barrel. A pcp has a small valve, and a breech seal. More stuff = more issues.
-A spring gun can beat the heck out of your scope, Big Nikko's tend to break after a bit, and even if they dont break right away they get "loose" pretty quick. So you can have more scope issues with a springer. (i've eaten 2 Nikko's and suspect a 3rd is now done)
-As Hector mentioned for some reason they don't tend to travel well. They tend not to shoot the same from venue to venue as Hector mentioned; imo its that a springer continually shifts its zero and you have to find out what its doing today.

Sadly If you look at a big spring gun match its often about who's gun or scope didn't malfunction, the guns for some reason just tend to have issues at the wrong time. In Ky a few years back H Rushton had trigger issues and i snapped a spring. This year Hector's gun wouldn't cock and Tom Perritis scope took a dump etc etc etc. The Pcp's seem to hold together a little better when they're working right. But having said all that a spring gun in the right hands can do very very well.

kevin

Here are a couple of recent west coast matches which a springer did very well. You could also check out the match results for the Diablo group (link in signature) where the springers always do well.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/451309/m ... or+9-10-11

http://www.network54.com/Forum/451309/m ... eles+Range

http://www.network54.com/Forum/451309/m ... ships+2011






<table style="width:auto;"><tr><td></td></tr></table>
http://www.diablofieldtarget.org
I have a stable of top performing PCP rigs, but I decided to shoot springer these past 2 years. Yup, my scope went south at this year's Nationals, it was a real bummer, as I was shooting VERY well, and my goal was to win, but 'them's the breaks'

If you look at the 'outstanding' shooters, many of them came from Springer backgrounds (Harold, Paul C, Brad T, Jeff P, etc..) So my goal: win big competitions with a Piston, then move on the PCP. I don't think I'm alone in thinking that "if you can shoot a Springer well, you can shoot a PCP VERY well" If Paul B, Leo, Steve V, Cliff, Roz, Ken H. etc. ever decide to 'dedicate' time to shooting PCP - watch out! Then of course there's the 'robots' (Greg S, Doug M, etc.) who would score high shooting a Daisy Red Ryder, but they're inhuman with their ability!

Tom
CAFTA Governor
Reply
Share

Joined: March 8th, 2009, 4:24 pm

November 11th, 2011, 2:14 pm #10

While a spring guns barrel can shoot just as accurately as a pcp its not quite that simple. here are a few reasons:

-The recoil is considerably more when compared to a pcp. And since the pellet doesn't leave the gun till after the gun is recoiling its a lot more challenging to shoot well.
-The power output of a FT springer is typically at 12fpe so its more "challenging" to shoot.
-Triggers are generally rougher than a 1/2oz pcp trigger.
-Tim McMurray once told me "a spring gun is either broken or breaking". A spring gun is much more mechanically finicky than a pcp and its air valve. For example a spring gun will have a piston seal, a breach seal, a massive spring, spring guides, runny drippy lubes, spring linkages, and piston weight all of which act together before the pellet leaves the barrel. A pcp has a small valve, and a breech seal. More stuff = more issues.
-A spring gun can beat the heck out of your scope, Big Nikko's tend to break after a bit, and even if they dont break right away they get "loose" pretty quick. So you can have more scope issues with a springer. (i've eaten 2 Nikko's and suspect a 3rd is now done)
-As Hector mentioned for some reason they don't tend to travel well. They tend not to shoot the same from venue to venue as Hector mentioned; imo its that a springer continually shifts its zero and you have to find out what its doing today.

Sadly If you look at a big spring gun match its often about who's gun or scope didn't malfunction, the guns for some reason just tend to have issues at the wrong time. In Ky a few years back H Rushton had trigger issues and i snapped a spring. This year Hector's gun wouldn't cock and Tom Perritis scope took a dump etc etc etc. The Pcp's seem to hold together a little better when they're working right. But having said all that a spring gun in the right hands can do very very well.

kevin

Here are a couple of recent west coast matches which a springer did very well. You could also check out the match results for the Diablo group (link in signature) where the springers always do well.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/451309/m ... or+9-10-11

http://www.network54.com/Forum/451309/m ... eles+Range

http://www.network54.com/Forum/451309/m ... ships+2011






<table style="width:auto;"><tr><td></td></tr></table>
http://www.diablofieldtarget.org
http://www.network54.com/Forum/451309/m ... vens+Ranch
Reply
Share