Field-target with kill zone reducers.
The report covers:
- Benchrest
- Gunslynger
- Field target
- Statistics
- Power limits
- Why power limits?
- That’s it
With the Pyramyd AIR Cup so recently run a couple readers have asked me why .177 caliber is the caliber of choice for field target. Clearly the other two competitions of Gunslynger and 100-yard Benchrest use anything but .177.
Benchrest
In the Benchrest match that was shot at 100 yards the shooters had the wind to contend with. This year the wind was much calmer than I have ever seen it and it still blew pellets where they shouldn’t go. There was no foot-pound restriction in the Cup Benchrest match so the heavy .30-caliber pellets were favored. This year .25 caliber pellets could do well, but .30 cal was the favorite. Slugs were not permitted.
Some wonder why the even larger .357 caliber pellets aren’t the king, but I believe it is partly because of their greater cost and partly because the development has not been done in that caliber.
Gunslynger
In Gunslynger where both speed and accuracy are required .22 caliber reigns supreme with a few .25 caliber rifles also competing. The distance to the target is about half as far as Benchrest and the targets are much smaller.
Field target
But in field target .177 caliber is the only way to go if you want to win. Today we’ll learn why.
Field target favors the .177 caliber though it is not mandated. The reason it is favored is statistical rather than rule-based. Unlike 10-meter target where only .177 can be used, in field target it’s simply the best choice. In field target you shoot through a hole (a kill zone) in a steel target at a moveable paddle that stands behind the target. Hit the paddle and the target falls down.
Here are two field targets from the DIFTA club I once ran. The one on the right has a large kill zone. The one on the left has a 0.25-inch / 6.35mm kill zone. Try shooting through that without touching the edge of the hole!
If you hit the paddle and it moves far enough, the target falls and the shooter is awarded a point. But if your pellet strikes the steel target face first as it is trying to pass through the hole, it pushes the target backward against the release mechanism. It can also break into pieces.
If the backward push is hard enough it locks the target in the upright position. Even hitting the paddle with part of the pellet will often not be enough energy to drop the target if the face has been pushed back. The result is no point.
The arrow points to the paddle that has to move backward to drop the target.
Statistics
The .177-caliber pellet is smaller than all other calibers, giving it a statistically better chance of passing through the hole without contacting the side. Or, if it does touch the side, the .177 is small enough and light enough that it has less chance of locking the target in the upright position. It’s a probability thing and competitors understand that the smaller pellet is the best choice.
Power limits
The World Field Target Federation (WFTF) mandates a 12 foot-pound limit for field target. The lighter .177 pellets travel faster at that maximum permissible power than do heavier .20 and .22-caliber pellets. A faster velocity means a flatter trajectory that translates into better accuracy and improved scores for everyone.
In the US the American Airgun Field Target Association (AAFTA) usually mandates a 20 foot-pound limit. Once again the .177 shoots faster and flatter.
Why power limits?
The power limits are there for several reasons. First, the Brits mandated them because in the United Kingdom twelve foot-pounds is the legal limit for airgun power. Above that legal restrictions are enforced. So British shooters have become used to that power level.
Second, shooting at 12 foot-pounds or less takes a better shooter to hit a small target. I seldom see this mentioned, but it’s true. The Brits had to do everything at 12 foot-pounds or less and they had to learn to shoot better as a result.
Third, when the energy goes above 12 foot-pounds the field targets themselves start to suffer. American field target competition tops out at 20 foot pounds and some lighter-gauge targets will start to be damaged at that power level.
That’s it
So there you have it. Statistics, plus flatter trajectory are the main reasons the .177 is the caliber of choice for field target. There are no restrictions on the caliber you shoot, but anything larger than .177 puts you at a disadvantage. The bottom line of this discussion is the .177 caliber pellet is better-suited to field-target competition than any larger caliber.
BB,
Back in my Field Target days (~2003), I recall practicing next to “the $10,000 Dude.”
He told me he had spent $5000 for his custom ,22 caliber PCP and another $5000 for his scope.
At 50 yards, he was hitting 1/4″ spinners every time; I never hit one (with my .177 HW97 and 14X scope).
Someone like him can do well with .22 caliber in Field Target (he put his pellet through the 1/4″ hole at 10 yards and dropped the target); but I think guys like him are the rare exceptions, the unicorns. =)~
Everyone else pretty much stuck with .177 caliber.
Blessings to you,
dave
Tom,
Now I also realize why .22 is better than .177 for Metallic Silhouette targets. Higher statistical probability of hitting and causing the target to fall.
Good thing I remembered that you guys still have to adjust your clocks because of Daylight Savings Time. I was worried for a while that WordPress was making its own schedule again.
Siraniko
The image at the top of the article shows a squirrel target with four kill zone reducers. I would guess that in a typical field target course the kill zones would be variable based on the distances to the targets. In other words, the targets at greater distances would tend to have a larger kill zone than the targets closer to the shooter. This would tend to keep the required accuracy MOA (minutes of angle to hit the kill zone) within a reasonable range. Is there a typical MOA range that the course designers try to use in creating the field target courses?
Elmer,
The size of the kill zone helps determine how difficult a course will be. Brad Troyer gave us a way of factoring kill zone size and distance to the target into a level of difficulty number and many courses are rated by their “Troyer” factor.
And I should add that I believe 1/4-inch kill zones are not used much, if at all, anymore.
BB
Very interesting, thanks.
To expound on what BB said, most all field target courses are laid out with targets from ten to fifty-five yards. The size of the hole does not necessarily determine the range to the target. Sometimes the smaller hole is at the longer range, depending on the difficulty of the course.
Thanks RR, yes freedom to design a field target course as difficult or easy as wanted makes sense to me. At this point in time I can relate to MOA better than I can “Troyer factor”. I am just curious and will try to find out more about field target courses.
To keep the interest up in field target, it may be time to have another “class” added. As has been suggested here, maybe an “off the shelf” or “identical airgun and scope” class. Cutting back on the high finance end of things might bring in more shooters.
Ridge,
The difficulty with your idea is that people will never leave things alone. When the Hunter class started it was supposed to be just what you said—an easy class for people who don’t want to go to all the trouble of following WFTF or AAFTA rules. But it quickly devolved into an equipment race. At the recent Pyramyd Air Cup I saw shooters with $4,000 Thomas rifles that had $2,000 scopes on them.
Granted there are no spending limits for the Hunter class, but it’s an indication of what people will do to win.
The only time I have seen a class like you mention is the Student Air Rifle (SAR) concept.
BB
BB,
That is a problem that needs to be solved. Once upon a time I myself was developing an interest in Hunter Class field target, but as you have said it quickly devolved into a money race. That is what happened to field target in the first place. Once upon a time there were a bunch of hunters looking for a sport to keep their eye in during the off season and get rid of some of the bragging. Then it became organized and the money found out about it.
Now you know the rest of the story.
RR,
How about an iron sights class?
No optics and nothing fancier than a Williams peep (or an Anschutz diopter for the big spenders 😉 )
Bob,
As I recall we tried that once in my old field target club. It was boring because the targets past 10 yards never fell, as I recall. In fact I think that was what gave us the idea for a whacky match where you could shoot anything that was not a real FT rifle.
BB
BB,
How come the targets past 10 yards never fell?
In service rifle matches, people are shooting targets at 200, 300 and 600 yards over iron sights.
Bob Ryan,
I don’t know if you read my reply down a way but it partially answers your question.
The Service Rifle Competitions are a different animal from Field Target.
General Accuracy Expectations
Firing Position Distance (Yards) Target Ring Size (approx. MOA) Shooter Goal (MOA)
Standing (Slow Fire) 200 10-ring is ~1.7 MOA Aims for 4–8 MOA group size or better to score well
Sitting/Kneeling (Rapid Fire) 200 Top scoring ring is ~8 MOA Aims for 4 MOA or better
Prone (Rapid Fire) 300 Varies by target, often F-Silhouette Aims for 2–4 MOA or better
Prone (Slow Fire) 600 Varies by target, often E-Silhouette Aims for 1 MOA or better
MOA (Minute of Angle) at Distance: 1 MOA is approximately 1 inch at 100 yards, 2 inches at 200 yards, 3 inches at 300 yards, and 6 inches at 600 yards.
Target Sizes: Competitive targets (SR-1 at 200 yards, MR-31 at 600 yards, etc.) have scoring rings of varying sizes designed to challenge shooters at different distances.
Match Rifles vs. Service Rifles: While modern service rifles (e.g., AR-15s) are highly accurate, purpose-built match rifles with specialized components (barrels, sights, stocks) offer enhanced precision, which can improve scores for the average shooter.
shootski
Shootski,
As I remember, the people that I used to shoot with when I was shooting Service Rifle, their coach expected ‘clean’ scores at rapid sitting and rapid prone. He commented that they were both very well supported positions and it should be easy. (But then again, the personalized license plate on his truck was ‘490 NMC’ & he was ‘distinguished’ in both pistol and rifle.)
Thanks for helping me dredge up that bit of memory.
Bill
billj,
Glad to have been of dredging Service!
490!
I was torn by the time commitments of keeping a family together and staying on top of my flying/mission skills. There was also a strong desire to get on the escalator to National Match Competitions but just not the time to add that too. Every time i would requalify at the small arms range the potential was reinforced by the results and all the good natured advice from fellow shooters to just Go For It. It was particularly hard in Germany when the U.S. Army types would shake their heads at that Navy guy not going for it….
I get vicarious satisfaction at my adult son and daughter’s performance at the shooting range and now my grandsons are shooting and having a blast flying RC Aircraft that are miniatures of the real ones i flew.
shootski
Shootski,
That coach, If asked, considered that since he was in the “High Master” qualification for Service Rifle, that would be the ‘floor’ for what he would score at a match. He was hard to beat. When he went to the various qualifying matches for the All Army Reserve Team, he would always shoot a score that would qualify him for the team, but his ‘day job’ would not afford him the latitude to be on the team. An excellent coach.
Bill
Longer range targets have bigger bullseyes. FT you may have a small “kill zone” at the longer distances. With my eyesight, I would have a hard time seeing a small kill zone past 20 yards. But there could be another way, perhaps. Sort of like the gunslynger silhouette but lets say there’s a vital zone that’s scribed into metal before it’s painted, so if you hit the target you get a point, but you get an extra point for a shot inside the vital zone. That way, you have half a chance to hit the target with open sights. But for someone who could consistent hit the chicken’s head, they would score extra points.
BB, would FT be boring with open sights at shorter distances and larger kill zones up to 1″? I don’t think so. Sounds like the kind of shooting I did a while back with my Crosman 760 Pumpmaster (my first airgun).
Roamin,
Seeing the kill zone was most of it. If the sun moved and a tree caught them in shadow you might not even see the target. The kill zone never.
BB
Know anyone who has used .20 caliber for FT? Asks Curious FM.
FM,
Cannot say that I do, but not being rich, I have never been involved in field target.
Off topic again, Im looking at an old Walther LG 200. It probably has not been used in quite awhile. No air in it and no way to test where it is. Anyone have any experience with this one ? Should I walk away ? I would appreciate any advice, testimonials, or warnings. Thanks, Fishoot
fishoot,
I have no experience with the Walther LG 200.
BB
Thanks BB, I’m gonna think about it, I guess.
B.B. and Readership,
I was drawn back to adult airguns because of FT and my son and daughter needing a way to shoot (learn to shoot) in the suburban/urban area we returned to on getting back from a number of back to back overseas (OUT-CONUS) tours of duty. My initial impressions of FT back in the early 1990’s turned me off for the same reasons most of you are voicing in your current comments. It reminded me of my Teen years dabbling in Stock Car and Sports Car racing. Folks spent money and cheated. They tried standards compliance inspections but that could be onerous to the folks that didn’t cheat. I returned to just shooting for improvement of shooting skills; no need to compete to do that!
But that isn’t what i really want to point out in this REPLY. I want you all to think about how MOA (measured C-T-C isn’t a good measure of how hard it is to put any caliber pellet through a Kill Zone Reducer. C-T-C is a great metric for comparing the precision/accuracy of different calibers but not shooting through a small circular hole. Don’t believe me?
If i take a .50 caliber bullet and shoot Sub MOA groups (approximately 1/4 inch at 25 yards) will any of them get through the 1/4″ hole, or even the 1/2″ hole at 45 yards? A perfectly centered .50 caliber shot might get through the latter but i bet with the precession and nutation (wobble) it wouldn’t.
And yes most pellets wobble too!
Any questions? Happy to go deeper.
shootski
You mentioned the larger than .30 calibers not having the development.
I say YET!
Think of the natural progression we have seen in the last 20 or so years.
20 years ago or so, if you had a .25 caliber Airgun, you had bragging rights.
It may have been a modified crosman 2260 running 12 gram co2 with a rainbow trajectory, or a Discovery running 2000 psi fill and 15 shots per fill, but you had the big kid on the block. (The Discovery was introduced in 2007, but not in .25 caliber.)
If you were rich you had one of Lloyd Sikes’ Disco Doubles to compensate for the low shot count.
The .25 caliber Benjamin Marauder was introduced in 2010, a scant 15 years ago.
And yet it was and to some degree is still the benchmark .25 caliber gun others are compared to.
Any larger calibers were considered “just for hunting.”
.30 caliber has had a lot of development and money spent on that caliber in the last few years.
In 5 years or so, .35 caliber may be in the same position as the .30 is now.
We are already seeing it in RMAC (Rocky Mountain Airgun Challenge) where .35 caliber Airguns are allowed in the 100 yard benchrest event.
BigBore Airguns generating 140 ftlbs of energy minimum with slugs, dominate the field. And are fired at steel targets from 100 to 450 yds.
If the airgun competitions keep having larger and larger monetary prizes, the development money will follow the favored calibers.
Ian.
One of Lloyds Disco doubles in a Boyd’s stock.
Ian.
45Bravo,
That is one, very nice, Air Rifle. Can you use that scope mounted that low or was it a quick photo-op mounting.
No it was not a photo op.
I no longer own that airgun.
It was a modding black hole that I went down.
The only factory parts on that gun at the time of the photo were the trigger guard, the main pressure tube, the receiver, and the valve.
The Boyd’s Blaster stock and the parts From Lloyd were the “big ticket” parts, but not as bad as you would think in the grand scheme of the gun.
It was the little things, $10 here, $20 there.
Oh look a TKO moderator, cool, $40.
What was a $250 ish gun, suddenly became a $1000+ gun.(with optic).
That in it’s heart was still just a Benjamin Discovery…
This was the airgun that broke me from extensively “modifying” my airguns.
Ian.
Ian,
Yea I ran out of money before I could put in a Marauder trigger. And the Challenger trigger guard.
Bad thing is, I haven’t messed with that platform in years..
Yet I have a marauder trigger set and a BUNCH of 22xx parts in the parts bin.
I really enjoyed that rifle.
It was my backyard squirrel gun for years.
I wish Boyd’s still sold stocks for Airguns.
There are so many on the market that have hardwood stocks that could use a fancy upgrade.
Ian.
Ian.
Ian,
I returned that fancy stock to Lloyd, so maybe you can talk him out of it?
BB
I appreciate the information, but at this point in time I have no desire to revisit the design.
Other than in its stock form.
As an entry level used pcp to compare its quality/accuracy to more modern similarly priced offerings.
Ian.
45Bravo,
I bought my Benjamin Discovery very early (first Day) in the sales campaign so i don’t know if they got extra care along with the gorgeous Walnut stocks but mine ran trouble free until just this year. It certainly isn’t Match accurate but it gained in precision as pellets improved in the interim years. With the right pellet the original Crosman barrel shoots just sub MOA on hpa. CO² was never as good but that was with the pellets from two decades ago.
You should get one of the original ones if you can find one at not too steep of a mark-up.
shootski
OK, so I get the new P/A Volume 30 Advert Pamphlet and on page 11 I see a NEW Air Venturi “Alpha, Compact Tube” for $269.99 with two pictures of a long and short tactical PCP rifle. Can’t find any info on the rifle. Is it a tube or a .22 Cal tactical air rifle for sale?
Could it be a sign?
The other day I mentioned that if the Umarex Zelos came in .30 Cal I would get one since I don’t have any .30 Cal air rifles in my collection. Now we have .30 Cal mentioned in this blog. Tonight at 11:’30’ I opened Pyramyd Air’s latest catalog, VOLUME 30 and find an air rifle I did not know existed, the Hatsan Blitz 777 PCP and it comes in .30 Cal. Not only that it comes in my favorite operating system Select Fire Semi-Auto.
It looks Tac-T-Cool, another favorite thing of mine and not weird like the previous Blitz model. Cost a lot more, but that built in fun factor simply is not a low buck option. Although it is very reasonable compared to others out there.
There seems to be some ‘not so happy’ campers out there reviewing it and some overjoyed owners on u-tube shooting it. To top it off P/A has an 11% discount on it, so I took the gamble. Just hope I don’t have to wait 30 days to receive it and another 30 to get around to shooting it. You know, being well over 30 and really into procrastination. A thing I do really well being retired like staying up well past 1:30 in the morning. ;(
Bob M,
I hope you .30 caliber shoots true and does bullets (slugs) as well!
I learned that after leaving my thirty’s behind it was getting harder and harder with every passing decade of life to HOOT late into the night with the owls and still be able to SOAR with the eagles the next morning :^)
I’m still guilty of violating that silver (eagle) rule frome time to time ;^)
shootski
Shootski,
Already looking for custom parts for the Blitz 777. Apparently, there is a bolt seal in the breach that will need attention to keep it working as advertised, as in lube, on a regular basis along with other moving parts… Rapid fire use comes at a price.
The acronym ‘KISS’ is probably not referenced much when designing a select-fire PCP air rifle.
I have always been a ‘Night Owl’, preferring night shifts where the work gets done and the a– kissing is kept to the minimum.
When Glenn Frey from the Eagles wrote the song “You belong to the city” in the 80’s, I immediately believed he walked in my shoes in NYC when I carried a switch blade next to my comb.
The Navy really changed my path in life.
Shootski,
Thanks for that summary of service rifle competition accuracy expectations.
I think a similar competition, scaled down for iron sighted air rifles at say 10, 20, 30 and 60 yards, could be fun to try.
Bob Ryan,
Another FUN match is Long Gong: https://www.creedmoorsports.com/long-gong-competition#:~:text=ricochets do not.-,Scoring,in every fundamental of marksmanship:
I like the rules governing this style FUN match!
The over distance is what makes this type of match more of a test of the shooter’s skills rather than the typical equipment race. Shooting airguns with iron sights at 100+ on similar steel targets could be a fun match.
shootski