Dellet below would be the Turkey Shoot setup and the same rifle used. And there is nothing special about the setup being used. The only difference in the rifle now is it is 25-35 but with the same size barrel as 32-40. I also mentioned it was a 3 shot event and I never said the lifesaver was always hit on the very first shot. 

(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

" No doubt that there was competition shooting from the bench with highly specialized equipment. "

John D Kelly was one of the best rest shooters from about 1885 to 1905. Pope considered him to be the Dean of Benchrest. Below is a picture of his 38-72 Kelly Pope Ballard that Pope also considered to be his best work. And there is nothing specialized about it and it is basically just an offhand rifle. 

(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

Dellet one ticket as I also noted included three shots for a dollar for the chickens and 3 shots for five dollars for the Turkey. 
Maybe I should have said three attempts for each one won and not shots. 

JLouis wrote on Jan 4^th, 2022 at 10:25am:

There are two scopes in the picture, prove the Sidle is the one mounted on the rifle. The wording under the rifle only states what is in the photo and does Not mention the second scope. The scope mounts do not appear to be 1905 vintage.

Quote:


Your statement above, is as misleading as the words under the photo. You very clearly state that people who shot your rifle went home with three chickens and a turkey after only buying one ticket.

Any body with any critical thinking skills can probably work out that since you had to buy a different ticket to be able to try for a turkey, that you probably meant at least two tickets were needed. Never mind it should have been impossible to score 4 hits in three shots. But three chickens in three shots is certainly possible tho improbable.

The problem is that you did not write what you want me to now believe was your intended meaning and want to offer an alternate version to explain your substandard writing skills.

Yet concerning the photo, you will not even entertain the same thought. That the person who wrote the caption, should have been more clear. This is either a double standard, or complete hypocrisy.

That photo has been discussed on this forum multiple times with the same results. You against everyone else in the belief that it is the Sidle mounted on the rifle.

Your need to be correct, vs getting the correct information recorded
for the future to benefit from, can not be displayed any more clearly than in this thread.

Most likely the better caption for the photo should read something like,
The picture of the rifle as is now, along with the original accessories and scope.

Just like your account of the great chicken shoot should have been more clear about the number of shots required to hit the lifesaver.

Enough drift for me, my point is clearly made. I’ll leave it to others to correct me if I am wrong. I have made a point concerning accuracy of information, and expecting peer review is part of that.

JLouis wrote on Jan 4^th, 2022 at 12:01pm:

In our last conversation about that scope scope, I questioned the mid tube adjustment that is pretty well unique to Fecker. Basically you told me that Fecker probably got the idea when he worked for Sidle making scopes. I let it go then and will let it go again.

As for shooting life savers, I always seem to have trouble hitting them. If I want to hit something I choose something challenging Full discloser, 22LR  CPA and not 200 yards 

Dellet nice shooting and in all honesty the 22 events were allot more difficult for me. More so related to not being able to find or being to afford what my CPA liked. The cost of that ammo to me became more of a money game and why I finally stopped. It was not the cost of the ammunition to just shoot a match. But to be able to continually go out while also having to practice with the same to become and then to remain being competitive. Not being able to buy a case at a time and every time I ran out I had to start from scratch all over again. Even just a change in the lot number or which machine it came off of would just never be the same. This still holds true today and why some of the Rimfire sports are now so expensive after the initial cost of a rifle.

JLouis wrote on Jan 4^th, 2022 at 12:49pm:

Do not try to blame my ability to read and comprehend for not understanding or mis interpreting the garbage that you wrote. Any person that actually read and digested your words would come come to the same conclusion. The only possible excuse for it coming to that conclusion would be experience at your shoot and being told that one ticket was good for, one 3 shot chance at one chicken. If you hit the target on the first shot, the next two shots were forfeited.
You clearly stated people were buying one ticket and going home with 3 chickens. Maybe your ass chewing had more to do with not being able to articulate the rules than shooter success.

The reason I do not let this go is this thread started in a way of how do we grow the single shot/Schuetzen game. My response in an earlier thread was basically members here are shooting the association in the butt. Some make grossly over exaggerated claims of what the rifles are capable of, of how purely the shoots are held to the standards of what was used/done in the day, and easy it is to do. All three of those assertions are 90% false.

You give the idea that people line up year after year to shoot your rifle because they have the best chance of bringing home a chicken. Let me be brutally honest, if your rifle is the best chance of hitting a life saver at 200 hundred yards of any rifle brought out by the club those days, either there are some very selfish other bench shooters in your club, or their rifles suck.

To try and lead people unfamiliar with what these rifles can do, to think that they shoot on par with a modern bench rest gun only sets them up for disappointment after a sizable investment. By doing that you do more damage to the image of the sport, and the integrity of the shooters, than by being honest and telling them that a good group for a Schuetzen rifle will be 10 times the size of a modern bench rest rifle and something to be proud of. 
There is a huge difference in shooting a sub 2” group, and a sub .2” group. I’m sorry you can’t admit that. But you do more damage to the discipline than help by not being realistic.

This type of argument also a problem