Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

New Category


nunnfaster, SASS #51021

Recommended Posts

.22's are not always lighter, as the barrels are usually the same on the outside but with smaller bores, so heavier.  If you need lighter guns then buy guns with short barrels.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

No.

 

Just my opinion.

 

 

 

16 minutes ago, Tyrel Cody said:

+1

 

No thanks.

 

You can load a light 38 that won't punish you.

 

And cost wise a ruger single six .22 will run you more than some 38s you could buy.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check out the prices for getting into any of the action shooting sports.   NON are cheap!!     GW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They aint lowering prices on golf, trap shooting, or fishing. Those sports keep growing. I feel it is a marketing direction, not a price point solution. Don't get me wrong, our marketing people are good. I just feel a different direction is the way to go.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Less Expensive Firearms?   Seems like all of our guns were cheaper before Cowboy shooting became popular

and prices seem to jump up enormously.

 

14 years ago, dealer price for a Ruger Vaquero was about $270 or $280+.

An original Winchester 97 shotgun was dirt cheap......I've heard as little as $100 and $150 for a fairly nice one.

A new Marlin 'Competition' was about $700, if I remember correctly, for the retail buyer.

I have been told that he regular Marlin 1894 Carbine models were still in the $300 price range.

 

As soon as WE (the cowboy shooting sport) start allowing .22 rifles to enter the game for everyone, my

guess is that the Henry .22 lever rifles will increase in price rather quick.

 

In some ways, WE have become our worse enemy on 'cheap' (inexpensive) firearms because many of us

will pay out some good bucks to play the game with good equipment.

 

..........Widder

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The local club has another match on other weekends that is rimfire steel target.  It helps get new people in due to lower cost and there is more participation from young ladies.  Makes me think.

 

I agree with others that CAS already has too many categories. Youngsters can already use .22 caliber.  What about allowing .22 caliber in senior age categories without adding another category?  But then some of the fastest shooters I know are seniors and I doubt they would welcome that change.  What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the plus side, having a .22 category OR allowing .22 would mean more Top Shooters

would own a Widder Soft Stroke Henry..... :lol::lol:

 

My backlog would be overwhelming..... :wacko: and drive me crazy.

 

I'm still not in favor of it..... ;)

 

..........Widder

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

On the plus side, having a .22 category OR allowing .22 would mean more Top Shooters

would own a Widder Soft Stroke Henry..... :lol::lol:

 

My backlog would be overwhelming..... :wacko: and drive me crazier

 

I'm still not in favor of it..... ;)

 

..........Widder

 

 

Fixed it for you. 

 

I'm not in favor either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A separate 22cal. match would be a good idea but not within a SASS/CAS main match. With the low power factor of 60, 32's & 38's can be shoot quite comfortably. Maybe this is an opportunity for you to start a separate 22 cal. CAS event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can’t believe the reaction to the suggestion that we allow 22’s to encourage new shooters into the sport.  Using a 22 is fun and convenient, especially for those who don’t load up rounds by the thousands like I do.

 

That said, I’m in agreement that we have not just too many categories, but FAR too many categories.  But that’s another discussion.

 

I’d envision a “22” category that would be defined by SASS as a stand-alone category that would NOT be competing with the current categories for overall or Top Gun prizes.

 

It’s not out of the realm of possibility that a club or individuals might have loaner guns and leather for prospective shooters to try.  Since a lot of new or prospective shooters don’t like to take free ammo to try out the sport, it’s easy to have some 22 ammo to sell them or they can use their own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree with the arthritis thing, I have it too! If you shoot light .38's or .32's you be fine! No need for another category!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, nunnfaster, SASS #52021 said:

We definitely need new shooters and don't want to loose any older shooters.  This may be the only way for SASS to last another 25 years. This is not to stir you up but may need serious consideration.

Address the issues brought up for why folks are against it...

 

Phantom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything is a compromise... and compromise is a matter or degrees...

 

We generally allow new folks to show up with less than the required number of guns to get introduced to the sport.  Yes, we expect and encourage them to then acquire the necessary firearms, and not depend on our largess... Do we advertise that fact?  No.  Doing so would probably result in demand exceeding supply.  If we then advertise that for new shooters, a new .22 category is available...   And folks go to the expense of gearing up for that category... When do we require they graduate to centerfire guns and play like adults?  Oh, snap!  They already spent their gun budget for the next 3 years!  (or whatever...)  If they couldn't afford center-fires before, they certainly can't after!

 

Say we (collectively), agree that for those shooters afflicted with this very common disease allow the use of .22 rimfire ammo and firearms... just how is it administered?  Do we require a Doctor's certification that (insert your name here) has arthritis and thereby qualifies to shoot .22 rimfire in his chosen category?  (Not exactly my idea of the "cowboy way").  And yet, my cynical lack of faith in the human nature is such that I envision rampant envelope stretching in the medical definition of "arthritis".  And, at what point has the arthritis progressed beyond which, even that option is not really viable... My aunt had arthritis so bad that simply holding a firearm would have been a safety concern? 

 

And in a sense of fair play... my arthritis is pretty much regulated to my knees, (the result of a well-spent youth on wooden sticks behind a powerboat)... am I eligible? 

 

I find that, at the club level, great efforts are expended in order that those interested can be introduced to and actually play this game.   'Nough said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, nunnfaster, SASS #52021 said:

Just thinking, light weight and less expensive gun options with cheaper ammo could grow the sport.  What I hear it is too expensive to get into SASS shooting that keeps new shooters from trying it.

IMHO that's just what they say when they aren't committed, intimidated by competition or are being nice and don't want to tell you they aren't sure if they like it enough to start.

 

I have had people tell me that all the time and then later in the conversation they tell me about their AR15 in 300blk with a suppressor, the AR 10, the two Glocks, three 1911's and then the 5 hunting rifles they have as well. Then we start talking about 4 wheelers, bass boats and every other money pit we hold so dearly. Then I wave to them as they drive away in an 2018 F250 supercab……...lol. 

 

I like to tell em'...…...yeah I had a safe full I guns I never used too. Some I literally never shot, some I did once in a while and some I wasn't even sure of...……..lol. Then I joined SASS and I have shot my SASS guns more times in a couple years than every other gun I have owned in my life combined (excluding my first bb gun). 

 

I really think it's an excuse or at least a priority issue for most that say it. I didn't have money to burn when I started but I sold things I wasn't using to buy things I wanted to use. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Griff said:

I find that, at the club level, great efforts are expended in order that those interested can be introduced to and actually play this game.   'Nough said.

 

^^^ This......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just one more thing.....I think the biggest mistake we make is telling folks to buy their stuff and come join us. I try to get them to shoot a stage using ours guns or shoot the match using others guns. They can shoot in blue jeans & tennis shoes if that's why they walked up in. 

 

Once they get a taste they'll find the money if they like it......but we gotta' set the hook rather than send them away thinking they need to drop 4K to play right away. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with most of the others, no new categories.......

 

I started in 1997,  joined in 1998. Seen them come and seen them go. My personal belief is that many left due to the dilution of the sport by the elimination of gun and shooting style categories for age based (and some style) categories. To me this was dilution of the sport. Therefore, adding a new category......even if it is a sub-category, would be to further dilute SASS shooting. JMO.

 

Sun

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without typing 3 pages out for a synopsis on why the difference in cost between .22 and .38 is not significant enough to make much of a difference in the number of new shooters, I'll put it this way...

   There is a finite number of people that would enjoy cowboy shooting enough to stick with it. Of that number, there is a small percentage with enough funds to not have to worry about cost. There is also a small percentage that do not have the funds to participate whatever the cost. There is a VERY large percentage comprised of people from those that can afford it by being a bit frugal to those that can buy what they want within reason. 

 By using the affordability argument for 22s, we are attempting to extract a VERY small percentage of prospective shooters from an already scant group.

I would propose to find a way to gain a percentage of new shooters from that very large group of prospects.

That's just this country boy's way of thinkin', and I been wrong before. Just not about a quad tap:ph34r:

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Tennessee williams said:

Without typing 3 pages out for a synopsis on why the difference in cost between .22 and .38 is not significant enough to make much of a difference in the number of new shooters, I'll put it this way...

   There is a finite number of people that would enjoy cowboy shooting enough to stick with it. Of that number, there is a small percentage with enough funds to not have to worry about cost. There is also a small percentage that do not have the funds to participate whatever the cost. There is a VERY large percentage comprised of people from those that can afford it by being a bit frugal to those that can buy what they want within reason. 

 By using the affordability argument for 22s, we are attempting to extract a VERY small percentage of prospective shooters from an already scant group.

I would propose to find a way to gain a percentage of new shooters from that very large group of prospects.

That's just this country boy's way of thinkin', and I been wrong before. Just not about a quad tap:ph34r:

  

 

I have no idea what you just said..... :P

Think I'll clean up my .22 rifles that I shot this afternoon..... :D

 

..........Widder

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.