Tracking Point: Do you have or tried a Tracking Point rifle?
- Thread starter TXAZ
- Start date
- Status
browningguy
Member
Never seen or heard of them, but from the site it looks like a tricked up AR style rifle with an expensive laser rangefinder scope. The money is in the optic is my guess.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Given the continued technological and financial issues, plus the personnel problems with the company, I would not be willing to spend that kind of money, I would not consider purchasing one, mostly out of fear that the company will not be around to handle any problems that may arise.
FAS1
Member
I have a customer here in San Antonio that I have become friends with that owns their AR15 and the longer range .338 Lapua Magnum rifle. He also purchased their ReconJet glasses after buying the .338LM. He has enjoyed shooting them and has invited me several times to go with him, but we just haven't met up to shoot together. They are an expensive toy for the most part and he jokes that he is spending his son's inheritance. He sends me little video clips every now and then and I joke that he now calls himself an expert marksman. He seems to enjoy them.
I did ask him how quick could he make a follow up shot when hunting and his reply was "none needed, lol". I do know that as a customer they were invited by the owner (John McHale) last year to his ranch for a big party. He really hasn't had anything bad to say about TrackingPoint from a customer's perspective. I know they have tried to reduce some costs and have a new CEO that was appointed in the spring, but they will need military contracts to survive long term. The owner has deep pockets and that's a good thing to keep this segment of his businesses going and he has a passion for it. He is developing it because it is something he wants to do and he doesn't need it, financially speaking.
I did ask him how quick could he make a follow up shot when hunting and his reply was "none needed, lol". I do know that as a customer they were invited by the owner (John McHale) last year to his ranch for a big party. He really hasn't had anything bad to say about TrackingPoint from a customer's perspective. I know they have tried to reduce some costs and have a new CEO that was appointed in the spring, but they will need military contracts to survive long term. The owner has deep pockets and that's a good thing to keep this segment of his businesses going and he has a passion for it. He is developing it because it is something he wants to do and he doesn't need it, financially speaking.
Jason_W
Member
I'm going to hold off on tracking point and just wait until someone comes out with the Deer-O-Matic 6000 which I envision as an automated drone that finds, kills, and processes my deer and then delivers it to my doorstep all while I enjoy a beer in my favorite chair.
Sunray
Member
$3,000 rifle. Scope & Accessories $9,900. $95 to install. Dual lithium ion batteries that last a total of 3.5 hours. Currently "on sale" at 11 grand. And only a 30 day warrantee. Can't afford to think about shooting one of 'em. I'd have to sell an organ.
illinoisburt
Member
Like all types of tech this will get cheaper and more reliable as time passes. I suspect it could be available as a optic/trigger package for most any firearm at some point. The science is pretty sound - pick the target then let the electronics decide when to trip the trigger. Possibly restrictions on technology transfer may keep this from foreign reverse engineering for the immediate future, but from a concept standpoint the pieces should be very inexpensive and are readily available. Any optic, a pair of lasers, smartphone processor, and a trigger solenoid. Maybe $200 from NC star or Leapers. We would all bemoan its long term reliability and clarity, but neophytes at a bench would be ringing steel at 500 yards all day long.
Arizona_Mike
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2013
- Messages
- 3,452
I don't like the fact that it is a closed system with a few loads in a few calibers and artificial restraints on the system with respect to range and lead speed. Done right this would be an open system with bluetooth ballistic data transfer from a phone or laptop, real time wireless anemometer link, etc.
Mike
Mike
My biggest issue is, the trigger control is taken away from the actual shooter, in several easy to imagine field situations, I can see this being MUCH more detrimental than helpful, if my sight picture is not on PERFECT target immediately after I want to send the shot, I will still probably score a beautiful hit, however if in the time it takes to get the sight realigned for the computerized trigger, another person/object/animal moves into the picture, how do I stop that bullet? In combat situations, I see this as hazardous to either innocents or friendlies. Long distance already means longer flight times, add shot delay after actual trigger pull? No thank you. Hunting the bull just off to the edge of the herd and a cow/immature/etc comes into the picture immediately during the delay even though your wobble would have safely scored a kill?
I am not saying I would take these questionable shots, but anyone who thinks this is improbable greatly underestimates the amount of YouTube heroes who WOULD take this shot. I foresee more troubles and/or lawsuits in this system. Based on the old information I looked up back then, this is being billed for long range precision in the field AS MUCH as it is inanimate targets. At the last I was aware, at least one state was outlawing "smart rifles" for hunting (I don't remember if it was only game animals or varmints too, and I BELIEVE it was NM). I think that for long range target practice, I have no qualms, but if a person plans on other uses, they should take a company offered course on proper usage in field situations. No such course exists to my knowledge, and most people would ignore the offer anyway, but it would ease my mind. There are plenty of ethical shooters left in the hunting community and I do not mean to impune their reputations at all, but just a few months ago we saw a YouTube video of a group of "hunters" lobbing round after round after round after round at their wounded long range pronghorn buck (wounded from the same long range shooting) and calling it a "good" hunt........ I envision a herd of wounded animals with this in the hands of like minded individuals who would probably take questionable shots in the first place but now do so more frequently and with more confidence because their rifle can't miss.
The downsides are not huge or many, but they are present enough to warrant as much caution as applause.
Last edited:
Also, there ARE smart scopes available MUCH cheaper than the entire system, that can be mounted to ANY rifle, calibrated for field conditions, and the user can ignore the referenced shooting point if necessary. Trigger control still being in the shooters hands as well. I see THIS industry leaving a mostly automated system in the dirt in ALL market aspects for years to come.
PegLegPeat
Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2016
- Messages
- 75
That is why I am teaching my kids to shoot.
You're better than me, mine only know about the cutting and dragging/carrying process thus far, we'll get there though
coloradokevin
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2008
- Messages
- 3,285
90% of long range shooting is making the wind call. Getting your proper elevation (hold over for distance) dialed is simply a mathematical equation based on the ballistics of your round, your atmospherics, and your distance to target. Unless something has changed since I last looked at this system, it merely "calls" your elevation for you, and releases the shot when you have a steady hold on target. Making the right wind call is where you'll hit or miss though, and the scope can't do that for you.
I shot a version of the Tracking Point rifle when I worked for Remington back in 2011. This particular version informed the shooter via the optic when you should pull the trigger based on whether or not you were on target. I wasn't impressed with the overall system at the time. I think it used a wifi interface to show the shooter's view on a laptop or was it Bluetooth .. I don't remember. Anyway, it was big, heavy, clunky and expensive. About that same time I shot what was the new Remington MSR which I liked a whole lot more than the TP rifle.
the way the version i saw worked was you painted the target, and when you were satisfied with that, then you held the trigger down and moved the rifle around. as long as you were holding the trigger, if the rifle passed through the right spot, it would shoot. it's still completely in the control of the shooter because at any time you could release the trigger and it would not fire.
there were many many other cool features about the $25,000 version of the TP that was built on the surgeon actions. not sure how many have been replicated in the cheaper versions.
i think the tech is amazing and fascinating. no desire to own it. what i want is completely different
there were many many other cool features about the $25,000 version of the TP that was built on the surgeon actions. not sure how many have been replicated in the cheaper versions.
i think the tech is amazing and fascinating. no desire to own it. what i want is completely different
lonegunman
Member
I saw two of them at a local gun store when they first got press. Two local gadget geeks squandered major cash to buy them. They have never been fired to my knowledge. The concept depends on overly expensive hand built factory ammo or reloads with SD of less than 10FPS. It seemed like the civilian model was good to 800 yds or something. I got to fiddle with one, it was not that interesting.
I don't need to shoot golf balls at 600 yds, but I enjoy longer ranges and reload a decent round. Hitting a 12" plate at 500 yds is easy enough. I have steel 18" x 24" tombstones to 800 yds on my property. They are easy enough to ring with most military bolt rifles and fun to boot. Getting an average rifle shooter on the gong at 600 yds doesn't require a $15,000 set up.
I think the question of "Tracking Point" is answered with the phrase, "it provides a very expensive solution for a problem that does not actually exist."
I don't need to shoot golf balls at 600 yds, but I enjoy longer ranges and reload a decent round. Hitting a 12" plate at 500 yds is easy enough. I have steel 18" x 24" tombstones to 800 yds on my property. They are easy enough to ring with most military bolt rifles and fun to boot. Getting an average rifle shooter on the gong at 600 yds doesn't require a $15,000 set up.
I think the question of "Tracking Point" is answered with the phrase, "it provides a very expensive solution for a problem that does not actually exist."
i disagree with the above post. it might be true if you shoot prone or off a bench exclusively as a hobby.
try getting your average rifle shooter to hit the gong from field positions... say, standing in a field of waist-high hay. or using a fence post or wall or something as support. sure hitting a 12" plate at 500 is easy....laying down with front and rear support.
to be competitive, PRS shooters practice the positional stuff every day. but the tracking point makes an average shooter capable of hitting those targets from a standing position with no practice. that's the problem it solves.
try getting your average rifle shooter to hit the gong from field positions... say, standing in a field of waist-high hay. or using a fence post or wall or something as support. sure hitting a 12" plate at 500 is easy....laying down with front and rear support.
to be competitive, PRS shooters practice the positional stuff every day. but the tracking point makes an average shooter capable of hitting those targets from a standing position with no practice. that's the problem it solves.
"Can't afford to think about shooting one of 'em. I'd have to sell an organ."
Sell a piano instead, good organs are hard to find. Regarding Tracking Point, it's like new Ferraris that don't have a stick shift or clutch pedal. For the right guy it's the right car.
As for myself, four on the floor is good, heck, I even like "three in the tree". But I don't begrudge the guy who wants and can pay for the hottest technology. And I do admire the engineers who made the product viable.
Sell a piano instead, good organs are hard to find. Regarding Tracking Point, it's like new Ferraris that don't have a stick shift or clutch pedal. For the right guy it's the right car.
As for myself, four on the floor is good, heck, I even like "three in the tree". But I don't begrudge the guy who wants and can pay for the hottest technology. And I do admire the engineers who made the product viable.
- Status
