"IROC"-for shooting?

KYE-OAT · February 2, 2002, 01:28 PM

Is any one familiar with any competitive shooting, in which the shooters would all compete with IDENTICAL guns.....so it would be very much like the IROC racing for drivers from all different niches in motorsports ? I mean IDENTICAL , UNMESSED-WITH guns. Consecutive serial numbers would even be better...just to stress that the shooters would all be using the same thing.
I imagine this would never be too popular, knowing how much us gun-lovers like to "trick-out" our different weapons.
What would be really neat is if the top guys from all the different SHOOTING sports (benchrest, high power, 1000 yds, IR50/50, IDPA, sillouette, running target, trap, skeet, cowboy action, etc...) and have them compete in a straight-up 3-gun contest.....with IDENTICAL guns. What do you think??
I also think it would be nice from a novices point of veiw....as the focus would be on learning good shooting fundamentals, not whatever latest technological breakthru a person could do to/ hang off of their gun.
It is so easy to be pulled in by claims of accuracy increases when it is as simple as putting a 1000 round case of ammution thru our guns......anyhow, that's the angle I was gettin' at......

karlfitt · February 2, 2002, 08:38 PM

I like the idea.
But even better, since they don't all have to shoot at the same time, why not THE SAME GUN for all?
Of course it would be a different gun for each stage of the compitition. There would have to be a back up gun for each in case of a failure of some sort.

But all in all I like the idea.

Karl

WESHOOT2 · February 3, 2002, 08:01 AM

Been to a good number of matches, seen a good number of shooters.

Your experiment not needed, we already KNOW it's NOT THE GUN.

It's the shooter.

KYE-OAT · February 3, 2002, 01:24 PM

.....in instances where, to be competitive one needs to pour untold fundage into a weapon to be on par with others.
The pinacle of each Shooting sport is generally occupied by those who have the "wherewithall" to buy the best equipment.
The instances that the worst equipped competitor wins would be few and far between...if ever.
In a SAME GUN contest, it truely would be just the SHOOTER....and there would be no question about equipment.

eerw · February 4, 2002, 02:26 AM

I always thought this would be a cool match, but be a hefty fee..

you pay some bucks to enter a match..when you check in you pick up a gun..and ammo to shoot the match...

that way everyone shoots the same gun and modifications and the same ammo...then at the end of the match..you take home the gun...

cool...I thought so...

WESHOOT2 · February 4, 2002, 08:33 AM

Your thinking is flawed.

It is NOT the gun.

If a gun is reliable and sufficiently accurate then it becomes simply a test of skill.
Reread this.

Example: in January I competed at the S&W Academy with 69 other IPSC shooters. All classes and gun-types were well-represented.
Overall winner shot in Production Class, beating EVERYONE ELSE.

To be clear on what that means: ten rd maximum in magazines, scored Minor, stock gun (gun used was Glock 9mm), holster and mag carriers worn behind the hip-center.

This shooter beat others using optically-sighted compensated pistols holding up to 30 rds, drawn from holsters worn in competition-only positions, and mag carriers worn at the front.

Please convince me it was his gun.....................

stick · February 4, 2002, 12:03 PM

The IROC angle is interesting. To a degree that is what has happened with the abundance of divisions/classes/sports in the shooting disciplines. You if you don't compete "up" in division (i.e. "limited 10" gun in "open" or "service rifle" in a "benchrest" match), you do compete with nominally the same equipment.

There have been attempts to run an "overall" match or championship. The games are never truely discipline neutral. Think about the Masters or something like the Sprotsman Challenge. It is doubtful you'd ever find a large enough cross over in the competitors to make a definitive statement (shotgunners shooting a Palma match).

When it comes down to it, WESHOOT2 has it correct, it's the shooter not the gear. The best shooters are still the best the order may change around in the top 20 but that's about it. Think about the times Rob Letham has put away the space guns, picked up an iron sight boom stick and smoked a major match.

That being said I enjoy shooting against people of my skill level with my class of equipment. Not that I don't watch the scores of those "above" me

KYE-OAT · February 4, 2002, 12:24 PM

.....those instances are few and far between.
Been to a Benchrest match lately? I guaranty that the winner was not shooting a "stock" rifle......same goes for an IR 50/50 match. Matter of fact, IR 50/50 is the sport I was interested in trying....but a local competitor/ gunsmith told me my Ruger 10/22 Target would definitely NOT be competitive with the Winchester 52s and the Anschutz 64s......guess how much further up the "food-chain" a guy has to be to even entertain thoughts of owning a "competitive" rifle. Maybe ISPC is ONE type of shooting that equipment doesn't matter....but what about ALL the other types of shooting sports....i.e; when's the last time someone won the Grand American World Trap Championships with an H&R Topper? Or a NBRSA contest with a factory varmint rifle?
99% of the time it's the folks with the deepest pockets who are in the Competitive top 1%. You'll not be convincing me otherwise, sighting only single instances where the opposite has been the case.

stick · February 4, 2002, 07:02 PM

We will have to agree to disagree on the equipment/shooter discussion. Different experiences lead to different conclusions. It is my belief that I could switch gear with Tony Boyer (leaving him with a .3-.4 rifle) and he would still obliterate me at 1000yds. Hand Tubbs a iron sighted Service Rifle and let me run a Any Sight Match Rifle, I would be humbled as well. I have had a few lessons such as this taught to me by lesser known competitors.

I'll submit: If a person can drop down behind a competitve BR gun and run <.2 aggs but can only afford a stock varminter. Or fire 595/600 at will given a Hammer free pistol but 530/600 is it with an Ruger Mk2 then that person is at a financial disadvantage.

The largest $$$ advantage I see is in practice time, ammo and instruction. Which one of couldn't vastly improve by taking a week off and getting some world class instruction with unlimited ammo in our given discipline?

RickB · February 7, 2002, 12:42 PM

GSSF is pretty close to what your looking for, already.

ryucasta · February 7, 2002, 10:27 PM

This response is to "wrongo". While we'll agree that skill is paramount, it's been my experience that two evenly matched competitors using an open gun vs. a limited/production/ESP... the open gun wins hands down. This being due to a number of factors like Compensators, higher magazine capacities etc.

So kudos to the Glock winner and may they continue to win

February 2, 2002, 01:28 PM	#1
KYE-OAT Senior Member Join Date: July 6, 2001 Location: AR Posts: 121	"IROC"-for shooting? Is any one familiar with any competitive shooting, in which the shooters would all compete with IDENTICAL guns.....so it would be very much like the IROC racing for drivers from all different niches in motorsports ? I mean IDENTICAL , UNMESSED-WITH guns. Consecutive serial numbers would even be better...just to stress that the shooters would all be using the same thing. I imagine this would never be too popular, knowing how much us gun-lovers like to "trick-out" our different weapons. What would be really neat is if the top guys from all the different SHOOTING sports (benchrest, high power, 1000 yds, IR50/50, IDPA, sillouette, running target, trap, skeet, cowboy action, etc...) and have them compete in a straight-up 3-gun contest.....with IDENTICAL guns. What do you think?? I also think it would be nice from a novices point of veiw....as the focus would be on learning good shooting fundamentals, not whatever latest technological breakthru a person could do to/ hang off of their gun. It is so easy to be pulled in by claims of accuracy increases when it is as simple as putting a 1000 round case of ammution thru our guns......anyhow, that's the angle I was gettin' at...... __________________ It is better to be a "human-doing" than a "human-being"..

February 3, 2002, 08:01 AM	#3
WESHOOT2 Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 1999 Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country) Posts: 14,324	IME Been to a good number of matches, seen a good number of shooters. Your experiment not needed, we already KNOW it's NOT THE GUN. It's the shooter. __________________ . "all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"

February 3, 2002, 01:24 PM	#4
KYE-OAT Senior Member Join Date: July 6, 2001 Location: AR Posts: 121	Except........ .....in instances where, to be competitive one needs to pour untold fundage into a weapon to be on par with others. The pinacle of each Shooting sport is generally occupied by those who have the "wherewithall" to buy the best equipment. The instances that the worst equipped competitor wins would be few and far between...if ever. In a SAME GUN contest, it truely would be just the SHOOTER....and there would be no question about equipment. __________________ It is better to be a "human-doing" than a "human-being"..

February 4, 2002, 08:33 AM	#6
WESHOOT2 Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 1999 Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country) Posts: 14,324	WRONGO!!! Your thinking is flawed. It is NOT the gun. If a gun is reliable and sufficiently accurate then it becomes simply a test of skill. Reread this. Example: in January I competed at the S&W Academy with 69 other IPSC shooters. All classes and gun-types were well-represented. Overall winner shot in Production Class, beating EVERYONE ELSE. To be clear on what that means: ten rd maximum in magazines, scored Minor, stock gun (gun used was Glock 9mm), holster and mag carriers worn behind the hip-center. This shooter beat others using optically-sighted compensated pistols holding up to 30 rds, drawn from holsters worn in competition-only positions, and mag carriers worn at the front. Please convince me it was his gun..................... __________________ . "all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"

February 4, 2002, 12:24 PM	#8
KYE-OAT Senior Member Join Date: July 6, 2001 Location: AR Posts: 121	Like I said..... .....those instances are few and far between. Been to a Benchrest match lately? I guaranty that the winner was not shooting a "stock" rifle......same goes for an IR 50/50 match. Matter of fact, IR 50/50 is the sport I was interested in trying....but a local competitor/ gunsmith told me my Ruger 10/22 Target would definitely NOT be competitive with the Winchester 52s and the Anschutz 64s......guess how much further up the "food-chain" a guy has to be to even entertain thoughts of owning a "competitive" rifle. Maybe ISPC is ONE type of shooting that equipment doesn't matter....but what about ALL the other types of shooting sports....i.e; when's the last time someone won the Grand American World Trap Championships with an H&R Topper? Or a NBRSA contest with a factory varmint rifle? 99% of the time it's the folks with the deepest pockets who are in the Competitive top 1%. You'll not be convincing me otherwise, sighting only single instances where the opposite has been the case. __________________ It is better to be a "human-doing" than a "human-being"..

February 2, 2002, 08:38 PM	#2
karlfitt Member Join Date: October 11, 1999 Location: Loveland,CO,USA Posts: 34	I like the idea. But even better, since they don't all have to shoot at the same time, why not THE SAME GUN for all? Of course it would be a different gun for each stage of the compitition. There would have to be a back up gun for each in case of a failure of some sort. But all in all I like the idea. Karl

February 4, 2002, 02:26 AM	#5
eerw Senior Member Join Date: March 18, 2001 Posts: 395	I always thought this would be a cool match, but be a hefty fee.. you pay some bucks to enter a match..when you check in you pick up a gun..and ammo to shoot the match... that way everyone shoots the same gun and modifications and the same ammo...then at the end of the match..you take home the gun... cool...I thought so...

February 4, 2002, 12:03 PM	#7
stick Member Join Date: September 6, 2001 Posts: 90	The IROC angle is interesting. To a degree that is what has happened with the abundance of divisions/classes/sports in the shooting disciplines. You if you don't compete "up" in division (i.e. "limited 10" gun in "open" or "service rifle" in a "benchrest" match), you do compete with nominally the same equipment. There have been attempts to run an "overall" match or championship. The games are never truely discipline neutral. Think about the Masters or something like the Sprotsman Challenge. It is doubtful you'd ever find a large enough cross over in the competitors to make a definitive statement (shotgunners shooting a Palma match). When it comes down to it, WESHOOT2 has it correct, it's the shooter not the gear. The best shooters are still the best the order may change around in the top 20 but that's about it. Think about the times Rob Letham has put away the space guns, picked up an iron sight boom stick and smoked a major match. That being said I enjoy shooting against people of my skill level with my class of equipment. Not that I don't watch the scores of those "above" me

February 4, 2002, 07:02 PM	#9
stick Member Join Date: September 6, 2001 Posts: 90	We will have to agree to disagree on the equipment/shooter discussion. Different experiences lead to different conclusions. It is my belief that I could switch gear with Tony Boyer (leaving him with a .3-.4 rifle) and he would still obliterate me at 1000yds. Hand Tubbs a iron sighted Service Rifle and let me run a Any Sight Match Rifle, I would be humbled as well. I have had a few lessons such as this taught to me by lesser known competitors. I'll submit: If a person can drop down behind a competitve BR gun and run <.2 aggs but can only afford a stock varminter. Or fire 595/600 at will given a Hammer free pistol but 530/600 is it with an Ruger Mk2 then that person is at a financial disadvantage. The largest $$$ advantage I see is in practice time, ammo and instruction. Which one of couldn't vastly improve by taking a week off and getting some world class instruction with unlimited ammo in our given discipline?

February 7, 2002, 12:42 PM	#10
RickB Senior Member Join Date: March 1, 2000 Location: Boise, ID Posts: 8,517	GSSF is pretty close to what your looking for, already.

February 7, 2002, 10:27 PM	#11
ryucasta Senior Member Join Date: February 4, 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 431	This response is to "wrongo". While we'll agree that skill is paramount, it's been my experience that two evenly matched competitors using an open gun vs. a limited/production/ESP... the open gun wins hands down. This being due to a number of factors like Compensators, higher magazine capacities etc. So kudos to the Glock winner and may they continue to win

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search