Australian trials rifle

[Homer]

Their rules, you need to repro the one they already think is right! According to thier description, Lithy's is wrong. I think it's funny.... typical of the MSD heirachy to stuff it all up, and then refuse to acknowledge the correct... you'd think they were being run by a turki hehehehe

Son is there anything in that last comment?

Demo

[Son]

Son is there anything in that last comment?

Nah, mate... just a similarity in style, thats all. Make it up as you go along and anyone who proves you wrong, have them burnt at the stake as a witch....

I'm still sour on them for several little things years ago.. haven't you heard, I'm a nasty piece of work!

[trooper554877]

Nah, mate... just a similarity in style, thats all. Make it up as you go along and anyone who proves you wrong, have them burnt at the stake as a witch....

I'm still sour on them for several little things years ago.. haven't you heard, I'm a nasty piece of work!

so don't **** off the dog or he will bite?
So do we have a definate picture and or description of 1. The correct rifle as per the Army? and
2. one for the SSAA so called rifle?
Did you see my last post on this subject?
cheers
Ned

[Son]

Been away from here a couple of hours. All the SSAA has is the description showing calibre, make and model, mag capacity and scope/ sights.... the one they got the info from was probably a made up one anyway, or a scopeless one that somebody stuck a weaver on... (there was a second scope mentioned...but not a leupold).

The correct one as per the army(?) there isn't such a thing. As far as I can tell, sniper cell played around with a few different things and then Lithgow did what they asked and set up "a couple" like Lithy's. There was at least one machined out for a magazine at a unit workshop... but when asked to produce some, Sportco told the army to go jump.

There were racks of Omarks (a few dozen perhaps) in the battalions for use by their sharpshooters in competition with civvies at local ranges. But these were in fullbore configuration... unless somebody got hold of a couple, stuck scopes on them and called them snipers? More likely word of Omark sniper rifles at some stage got to someone who owned an omark and wanted to use it for F2...add a likely scope and bingo!... a lie is born!

[trooper554877]

Been away from here a couple of hours. All the SSAA has is the description showing calibre, make and model, mag capacity and scope/ sights.... the one they got the info from was probably a made up one anyway, or a scopeless one that somebody stuck a weaver on... (there was a second scope mentioned...but not a leupold).

The correct one as per the army(?) there isn't such a thing. As far as I can tell, sniper cell played around with a few different things and then Lithgow did what they asked and set up "a couple" like Lithy's. There was at least one machined out for a magazine at a unit workshop... but when asked to produce some, Sportco told the army to go jump.

There were racks of Omarks (a few dozen perhaps) in the battalions for use by their sharpshooters in competition with civvies at local ranges. But these were in fullbore configuration... unless somebody got hold of a couple, stuck scopes on them and called them snipers? More likely word of Omark sniper rifles at some stage got to someone who owned an omark and wanted to use it for F2...add a likely scope and bingo!... a lie is born!

So from your experience with them, would a full wood be accepted?
Is there any point in chasing it up with sniper cell and or John as to any authentication availiable of the beasty/

On a side note due to our last conv about rules, i am going to submit to the rules chairman of NRAA for publication and approval a couple of changes to the NRAA service rifle classes of rifles.
one is to include in the wording of the sniper class, pre or post 1975 and any evaluated or trialled rifle by defence forces.
so we will a pre 75 or post 75.
The reason for the date? It keeps things like the first edition of the marine sniper rifle, Omark, No4T, HT, etc all together and not against the latest and greatest plastic fantastics.

[Son]

Once again, who knows as to the configuration. John has a few here in the "back room" but none appear to have any markings like Lithy's.. and quite frankly, the only ones that will, will be the ones set up at Lithgow. All the rest could have been marksmans training/civ comp rifles or anything! A mate I worked with used to be in a regiment shooting team and he kept his personal Omark in the lock up at work, and said he thought the guys all owned their own Omarks, just "sponsored" for time and ammo.

Drawing a line in the sand with a date is a good move. As to where that line is... well, good luck in getting an agreement on that.

[Old Lancer]

OK, I posted the original thread for one reason, this June WA will be holding its service rifle state titles in Perth with a keen eye on using the results to select a state team to go to this years SSAA nationals, I already made myself a "T" clone which is eligable as a faithfull reproduction in class F1, as I also wish to compete in as many classes as I can since the comp is on my home range and I dont have any transportation issues, hence I wish to make a faithful repro of the Omark. Having said this I attended the 2010 SSAA nationals at Little River in Victoria, and as it was my first time I watched with interest the scrutineering process and with great care, this is how it went.
My no4 was scrutineered in standard class for day one with as issued iron sights.
my no4 was rejected on day two when I fitted the mk1 no32 and cheek piece and nominated F1 as it had already been used on the weekend even though I was using different sights, however I saw at least half a dozen Omark M44's being passed for class F2 with and without top wood and with a variety of scopes, the only restriction was if the scope was more than 10x it was set and taped and initialled at 10x or less.
This is how it happened and I challenge ANYONE to tell me it did not, I was there and I saw it.
If you attend the SSAAWA shoot at PFRC in june with a Omark M44 with a scope of 10x or less it will be scrutineered and classed F2 and you will be most welcome.
Thats exactly what I'll be doing with mine which is wearing a Parker Hale 6x
The pictures Lithy posted are good enough for me, my action is having dovetail grooves milled
and the stock is half wood and painted olive green. Thats as close to a faithful reproduction as I'm gonna get to a rifle which was only TRIALLED and with, lets be honest, fairly sketchy documentation!! Old Omarks are cheap as chips and very common so who cares if they are fitted with a scope and given an outing, have some fun. (BTW mine stands at AU$250 with the scope)
Just get on with it NED and I'll see you there

[trooper554877]

OK, I posted the original thread for one reason, this June WA will be holding its service rifle state titles in Perth with a keen eye on using the results to select a state team to go to this years SSAA nationals, I already made myself a "T" clone which is eligable as a faithfull reproduction in class F1, as I also wish to compete in as many classes as I can since the comp is on my home range and I dont have any transportation issues, hence I wish to make a faithful repro of the Omark. Having said this I attended the 2010 SSAA nationals at Little River in Victoria, and as it was my first time I watched with interest the scrutineering process and with great care, this is how it went.
My no4 was scrutineered in standard class for day one with as issued iron sights.
my no4 was rejected on day two when I fitted the mk1 no32 and cheek piece and nominated F1 as it had already been used on the weekend even though I was using different sights, however I saw at least half a dozen Omark M44's being passed for class F2 with and without top wood and with a variety of scopes, the only restriction was if the scope was more than 10x it was set and taped and initialled at 10x or less.
This is how it happened and I challenge ANYONE to tell me it did not, I was there and I saw it.
If you attend the SSAAWA shoot at PFRC in june with a Omark M44 with a scope of 10x or less it will be scrutineered and classed F2 and you will be most welcome.
Thats exactly what I'll be doing with mine which is wearing a Parker Hale 6x
The pictures Lithy posted are good enough for me, my action is having dovetail grooves milled
and the stock is half wood and painted olive green. Thats as close to a faithful reproduction as I'm gonna get to a rifle which was only TRIALLED and with, lets be honest, fairly sketchy documentation!! Old Omarks are cheap as chips and very common so who cares if they are fitted with a scope and given an outing, have some fun. (BTW mine stands at AU$250 with the scope)
Just get on with it NED and I'll see you there

There are certainly some anal retentive people out there who don't want there little power play to be disrupted.
I think in future we need to check with organizers before as to what is accepted or even some direction from higher on what is allowed and how it is done.
If you did the change the sight thing down here mate i wouldn't care less, go for it.
As for my Omark it's coming in the mail next week. Won't have dovetails but will have different mounts, gotta find a scope, What do you know about redfileds?
And I for one will be there in June, just need to sort some accommodation out.

Cheers
Ned

[muffett.2008]

And I for one will be there in June, just need to sort some accommodation out.

Cheers
Ned

C'mon Ned, just take your trusty(rusty) old entrenching tool and dig a hole in the sand, you might need a lighter coloured hoochie to cover it with.
Happy new leap year.

Oh yeah, my new years resolution, to give Ned heaps.

If you have a later model Omark, Ned, it will have a flat on it and a screw hole on the rear of the receiver, use a 1mm tapered mount, you can get them from the NRA state Assn. this will allow you to fit a target scope capable of 1000yds + and then can also be used for F class. (The screw hole will give you a correct line for the mount) (god I hate being nice)

[trooper554877]

C'mon Ned, just take your trusty(rusty) old entrenching tool and dig a hole in the sand, you might need a lighter coloured hoochie to cover it with.
Happy new leap year.

Oh yeah, my new years resolution, to give Ned heaps.

If you have a later model Omark, Ned, it will have a flat on it and a screw hole on the rear of the receiver, use a 1mm tapered mount, you can get them from the NRA state Assn. this will allow you to fit a target scope capable of 1000yds + and then can also be used for F class. (The screw hole will give you a correct line for the mount) (god I hate being nice)

Its allready got mounts on it and are not tapered. i am only looking at going to 600 in sniper class, not the belly floppers and not the benchrest lying down mob! been there done that and find it as boring as batshit!!
As to your new years resolution muff, bring it on, and i bet my e-tool is newer than yours!!
At least i don't live in a place where it's name is something you eat for smoko!!!
Cheers
ned