LOL, missed my chance to vote I am glad that the OP's preference won the vote, simply for the sake of enabling him to share with us. No hard feelings, I hope! I still feel that a can does not fit at all into the classic sporter guidelines that drew me to SuperStock in the first place, but an enthusiastic member able to participate happily in this forum is a win
If the votes keep coming and things change too much for some of us to accept, we "can" go elsewhere
This is one of the reasons I do not understand the problem with allowing them. The rifle is still there. Same rifle. The suppressor is not welded onto the barrel. We already allowed the threaded barrels. Now we allow the rifle with the can or without.
Did we miss that the threaded barrel has been legal for 4 YEARS? What did you suppose the threads were being used for? So for 4 years we have been saying your rifle is legal here if you unscrew the suppressor. Did anyone ever ask "Did you have something screwed ON those threads when we were not looking?" Was it SuperStock when the owner took the suppressor off to clean it and not SuperStock when he screwed it back on?
This reminds me of the story about the Emperor's Invisible Clothes we heard as kids.
Isn't this a whole lot more honest?
I predicted the Suppressors would lose the vote. I wanted them to win but I honestly thought I would be on the losing side again. When I'm on the losing side I let it go and it is over.
This time the side I chose wins and old friends PM me to demand that I explain myself on the forum. Sheeesh.
I would like to point out that not every one is allowed to have a 10/22 or any other semi auto for that matter. Our site can and is seen world wide and in many places what we know as a SuperStock rifle would not be allowed at all so there are likely places in the world where Suppressors are quite legal while semi autos are not.
It is also not a matter if it can add an advantage or not. There is not any competition in SuperStock so that would mean nothing. Even if we were to add Competition at a later date (not likely in our lives) the game or match owner could simply write suppressors out of his or her game or match.
We tend to think in absolutes and few things truly are.
Good points. I don't see why the anti suppressor attitude so many have. Maybe sour grapes if they live in one of the few states that ban them. But then again many things are banned in some states. I'm for them 100%.
Good points. I don't see why the anti suppressor attitude so many have. Maybe sour grapes if they live in one of the few states that ban them. But then again many things are banned in some states. I'm for them 100%.
Could be sour grapes but one member voted:
Quote:
No, not even approaching a common item even here in NC where they are allowed for hunting.
So he could have one and 45 states allow them so I doubt sour grapes has much to do with it. Heck if it was sour grapes I would have to vote NO!!! because I can not afford one! THAT is pretty sour I think
LOL, missed my chance to vote I am glad that the OP's preference won the vote, simply for the sake of enabling him to share with us. No hard feelings, I hope! I still feel that a can does not fit at all into the classic sporter guidelines that drew me to SuperStock in the first place, but an enthusiastic member able to participate happily in this forum is a win
If the votes keep coming and things change too much for some of us to accept, we "can" go elsewhere
That last line covers this whole thing and the previous actions on the Super Sport Heavy thread, folks have been staying away in droves, this is a desperate search for relevancy. We'll see what happens
__________________
https://mostlyrimfire.com
NRA Patron Member/GOA Life *Esse Quam Videri Ya'll*
Well, I must say I am surprised. Honestly I never thought it would come to a vote, and if it did that they wouldn't pass.
Honestly though, I do have some mixed feelings about it this morning. Don't get me wrong, I am glad suppressors got voted in. I do think they should be allowed, that is my personal opinion, and that was my goal once the topic got opened up for discussion. That has already been covered though, so no need to re-hash it.
What gives me the mixed feelings though is that I know there are other members here that did not want them included. To those members, I apologize. My goal was never to open up a personal struggle between members. The problem is, that to effect change and move forward (I know, some of you guys feel we didn't move forward here), there is always a battle between personal opinions. But there really isn't any other way for it to happen. There are always two sides to each discussion, each vote. I have, to the best of my ability, tried to keep everything as diplomatic as I could, and to be as respectful as possible through this whole process. But I do want those who opposed the rule change to know that I respect your opinions too, and that I wish there was a way that you did not have to feel as though you were giving something up, so that others of us could gain.
Having said all that, now I guess I better get my tail end out into the shop this week. The rifle I am working on now is not "game ready" yet. Most of the pieces are in place, but the rifle isn't ready for the tuning in process to start. I need to strip it down and spray some cerakote. Put it back together and tweak the bedding. Then I can start playing with ammo and takedown screw tension and find what it likes. Hopefully by later this week or early next week I will start having some progress pics to show.
You are very gentlemanly, and your consideration is very appreciated! I had mixed feelings, too, regarding the conflict between my personal opinions and a growing desire to accommodate your wishes. This is representative of an internal struggle that follows all men and women of conscience throughout their lives; balancing one's own interests against those of others. Considering the relatively low stakes involved here, allowance seems appropriate I know some people will have stronger reactions than I to things not going their way, but however passionate, investment here on the forum is primarily symbolic, and flexibility is a must if we're gonna be able to enjoy each other
That last line covers this whole thing and the previous actions on the Super Sport Heavy thread, folks have been staying away in droves, this is a desperate search for relevancy. We'll see what happens
For me, the attraction was the innovation, classic cosmetics, and lower pretension when compared to other forums. This was relevant to me because I find very little craft in buying high-end components and bolting them together. The tuning, tweaking, shaving, taping, grinding, refinishing, and modifying of parts impresses me. Don't get me wrong, I would love to own and operate a high-end Ultimate, but I would take little personal pride in it. And, while they may have an artsy, spacey beauty unto themselves, I submit that relatively few Ultimates look "classy". SuperStock goes another direction. Making due with less, figuring out how to improve things, and crafting solutions are all aspect of the spirit of ingenuity, of DIY mentality. There's also something pretty nifty about pulling groups with a basic sporter that approach or equal the accuracy of a .920, floated, target-style .22 rifle. Not sure what am trying to say, but I hope that the soul of SuperStock will continue even as some of the rules change. As Vincent has said, the inclusion of elements I disagree with, like suppressors, does not degrade my ability to post about my rifles, nor receive feedback and acclaim about my projects. Suppressors may muffle, but they won't steal my thunder
I guess to me the exterior looks is not so much what defines a rifle as what the rifle is on the inside. You could have a rifle that looks Ultimate (heavy barrel and fancy stock), but without the right parts on the inside it will never compete with a true Ultimate in accuracy. You can have a SS that looks factory, but blows the doors off most factory rifles. For me what SS was always about was to take factory parts, and modify them to make them function as flawlessly as possible. Now I know that is not everyone else's definition of SS and that is fine. We all have different tastes. My way of looking at things is often different. If aftermarket barrels, TG's, and milled receivers are what trips a persons trigger, then go for it.
I love taking factory stuff, and modifying it. And I like doing it myself. Sure, I know when I hit my limit and need to go ahead and pay someone. Well, most times I know. One thing I love about SS is that however good I can or can't make a rifle shoot, I know that 90% of it was done by me. That I didn't just buy parts, and put it together. And of course I know there is more to it than that, even when you are buying top-notch parts. But I just love the whole DIY tinker thing.
Obviously a suppressor is not a cheap component. I don't mind spending money when it is something I really want. But to me a suppressor is just a component, a part of the build. It doesn't change what the rifle is. My rifles are SS builds to the core. Factory barrels, factory bolts, factory triggers, all heavily modified to make them as good as I personally can make them. The suppressor doesn't change that fact. My rifles don't fit in Ultimate, they don't fit in Super Sport Heavy, they don't fit in Tactical, none of those things is what they are. They are SS rifles. They just happen to have a thing on the end that makes them quiet. That's all.
I guess to me the exterior looks is not so much what defines a rifle as what the rifle is on the inside. You could have a rifle that looks Ultimate (heavy barrel and fancy stock), but without the right parts on the inside it will never compete with a true Ultimate in accuracy. You can have a SS that looks factory, but blows the doors off most factory rifles. For me what SS was always about was to take factory parts, and modify them to make them function as flawlessly as possible. Now I know that is not everyone else's definition of SS and that is fine. We all have different tastes. My way of looking at things is often different. If aftermarket barrels, TG's, and milled receivers are what trips a persons trigger, then go for it.
I love taking factory stuff, and modifying it. And I like doing it myself. Sure, I know when I hit my limit and need to go ahead and pay someone. Well, most times I know. One thing I love about SS is that however good I can or can't make a rifle shoot, I know that 90% of it was done by me. That I didn't just buy parts, and put it together. And of course I know there is more to it than that, even when you are buying top-notch parts. But I just love the whole DIY tinker thing.
Obviously a suppressor is not a cheap component. I don't mind spending money when it is something I really want. But to me a suppressor is just a component, a part of the build. It doesn't change what the rifle is. My rifles are SS builds to the core. Factory barrels, factory bolts, factory triggers, all heavily modified to make them as good as I personally can make them. The suppressor doesn't change that fact. My rifles don't fit in Ultimate, they don't fit in Super Sport Heavy, they don't fit in Tactical, none of those things is what they are. They are SS rifles. They just happen to have a thing on the end that makes them quiet. That's all.
I hear ya, and tend to share your views on the DIY side. One of my SS rifles is "all Ruger", with only amateur mods and factory parts. Had I the skills and tools, I would re-crown and re-chamber OEM barrels, and rework my bolts myself
Well put Manford, I hope this forum is here 100 years from now, I'm just not convinced this will make any difference. I'd love to be wrong.
I think it already has, at least a little; look at the members posting their suppressed rifles in SS thus far. Even if they have previously shared those rifles, their interest is rekindled and they feel less hampered. It's a step in the direction of community and inclusion, though also a step away from classic sporting rifle cosmetics. They may have devices on the muzzles, but they're still SuperStocks
I think it already has, at least a little; look at the members posting their suppressed rifles in SS thus far. Even if they have previously shared those rifles, their interest is rekindled and they feel less hampered. It's a step in the direction of community and inclusion, though also a step away from classic sporting rifle cosmetics. They may have devices on the muzzles, but they're still SuperStocks
As I said the barrels have had threads allowed for four years. I have to think there have been things screwed onto the muzzle at some point. Did not change that they were SuperStock.
When I first came to TN I was at my new club range and a member had about 5 22 rifles and a KMK678GC MKII pistol just like mine except his had threads. He let me shoot the 10/22 and it was fun. I shot the MKII which is usually loud enough that I am not comfortable shooting one w/o plugs at least. This pistol was a little more muzzle heavy but not a lot because he had shortened the barrel to 4 or 5 inches I LIKE muzzle heavy in both rifle and especially pistols as they seem steadier on the hold and the target. The pistol convinced me that these devices are a kick. It was so much fun to shoot.
I did not even realize they were legal until I came to RFC and there was a discussion about one on a pistol and I asked if they were comfortable talking about something like that on the forum. That was when I learned that was legal. A couple years later I was shooting one!
I am glad that the OP's preference won the vote, simply for the sake of enabling him to share with us. No hard feelings, I hope! I still feel that a can does not fit at all into the classic sporter guidelines that drew me to SuperStock in the first place, but an enthusiastic member able to participate happily in this forum is a win 
I know some people will have stronger reactions than I to things not going their way, but however passionate, investment here on the forum is primarily symbolic, and flexibility is a must if we're gonna be able to enjoy each other 
Linear Mode
