Omark sniper rifle

[Son]

There are a lot of self imposed grey areas in the rifle classes within all service rifle shooting clubs. They allowed terminology to define the rifles instead of makers marks.

A rifle that almost kind of might look something near to one that my uncles, friends, mother saw used by a fellow in a uniform forty years ago on the way to her optometrist, would almost certainly pass as a faithful reproduction of a rare and little known model presented for trials in a secret location by unknown people at an undetermined moment in history...

You usually find the bottom line is "if we allow it will it bring more people into the sport?"

I think it should be "genuine issued sniper" a) Pre 1947 or b) Post 1947 or c) "fake"...... no grey areas, just three classes

Sorry Ned, not taking the pi$$ out of you personally, had the same argument with the SSAA years ago... didn't go back...


Just spotted Neds post above/ real easy, buy a real rifle. You can't enter the Melbourne cup with a shetland pony, even if it's the same colouring as the Goodowindi Grey

[paulseamus]

Son

Getting a better definition of the boundaries is the whole point.

If one group has a loose set of rules, pushing the boundaries is one way of getter them better defined.

If Ned's project gets through, it will also find a new use for a few old Omarks.

Paul

[trooper554877]

One last thing,
If you want to use a rifle and you think it fits the class then YOU have to prove it to the executive committee of that match. If they are they are happy then anyone else who complains get refered to rule 1 and that is that it's been approved by the Executive. Thats the difference between SSAA and NRAA rules. NRAA does not have a table of allowed rifles and leaves it to the discretion of the Executive committee of that match. SSAA refers to the rifle class table and that is it. NRAA users must be aware that they have to prove that it does fall into that catergory, under the rules written in SSR's.
We will just have to agree to disgaree on this one Son. I am only trying to unite the service rifle fraternity in a way that that is legal, goes through the proper channels and benefits all.
and I really didn't take anything the wrong way personally, I have a much thicker skin than that. I just look forward to the day you and i can get together on the mound and rattle off a few rounds.
Cheers
Ned

[Son]

With you there, Ned!

As I said, my beef wasn't with the Omark issue or your association... but more with the rules not being applied evenly! I am all for defining the rules, even if I don't agree with some points- but I do prefer the KISS system of writing rules.

[muffett.2008]

Or you could always get some dumb mother like me to machine up a M44 action with a L1A1 mag in it and say well there you go.

[Son]

Son

Getting a better definition of the boundaries is the whole point.

If one group has a loose set of rules, pushing the boundaries is one way of getter them better defined.

If Ned's project gets through, it will also find a new use for a few old Omarks.

Paul

I generally found that pushing the boundaries was the problem... it caused all sorts of sub clauses and such to close or ratify loopholes that the firing line lawyers spend hours twisting to their own individual advantage. Nope.. black or white, no shades of grey will be entered into.

You forget the different groups are different groups because they have never been able to put their own self serving principals behind them and rally for the good of the sport. I think bellyfloppers should be banned from all other competitions...

[trooper554877]

Or you could always get some dumb mother like me to machine up a M44 action with a L1A1 mag in it and say well there you go.

mate when will you have it done?
cheers
ned

[Son]

mate when will you have it done?
cheers
ned

What do you need for the job, how hard is it to change a rego from "single shot" to "ten round magazine"

I have all the bits ready to go....

[Old Lancer]

There are a lot of self imposed grey areas in the rifle classes within all service rifle shooting clubs. They allowed terminology to define the rifles instead of makers marks.

A rifle that almost kind of might look something near to one that my uncles, friends, mother saw used by a fellow in a uniform forty years ago on the way to her optometrist, would almost certainly pass as a faithful reproduction of a rare and little known model presented for trials in a secret location by unknown people at an undetermined moment in history...

You usually find the bottom line is "if we allow it will it bring more people into the sport?"

I think it should be "genuine issued sniper" a) Pre 1947 or b) Post 1947 or c) "fake"...... no grey areas, just three classes

Sorry Ned, not taking the pi$$ out of you personally, had the same argument with the SSAA years ago... didn't go back...


Just spotted Neds post above/ real easy, buy a real rifle. You can't enter the Melbourne cup with a shetland pony, even if it's the same colouring as the Goodowindi Grey

"Buy a real rifle". Well, it would be great if it were that easy, but given the scarcity of genuine No4(T)'s and No 32 scopes and L96's et al its not that achievable is it?. Also given the astronomical sums these rifles are now fetching most proud owners only get them out of the safe to drool over and fondle them!. An old Omark however can be had for as little as $150AU and with a little time and thought be presented as a REPLICA trials rifle and used for its intended purpose, SHOOTING. The SSAA has it inclusivity policy right in my opinion because if you allow more types of rifle into a class then you might actually get a shoot off the ground, because there will actually be more people able to shoot in it.
There is an NRA club here in the west that will remain nameless for the fear of having a fatwa imposed that will only allow shooters to use a No1 mkIII* and nothing else and its numbers are dropping rapidly, if you put up barriers for people, don't be surprised if they turn around and walk away. You can keep your purism for the non-shooting collectors who own all the (T)'s anyway, there are some who think the best way of keeping our sport of service rifle alive and well is to keep it accessable. Just my opinion! Fire away.

[Old Lancer]

08-12-2008, 05:40 PM#37




Lithy


Senior Member


Join Date: Sep 2007Location: AustraliaPosts: 1,049






To answer some of the questions raised, yes it is one of the Oz Army Omarks from the seventies.

Whilst I've spent time in Mildura I didn't get this rifle there. It does have a bloke's name in pencil in the barrel channel that came from near there though.

The stock is a standard Omark wooden job that has been sealed and painted.

Omarks did leave the factory with a safety which was promptly disposed of for fullbore work. Mine's missing the connection from the wheel to the trigger assembly if anyone has one lying around.

Found this on that other forum, Nuff said