|
BeanTaco posted:Yeah I was trying to think of a good starting point to work with, and that's what most people think of. I do say it is the measure of an angle, and that 1 inch at 100 yards is ~about~ 1 M.O.A. I'd probably just give the value for multiple distances. I don't feel like doing trig but this should all be proportional, so 1/2 inch at 50m, 1 inch at 100, 2 inches at 200 etc. If you give a single value people tend to fixate on it more when it's really just some basic math.
|
| # ? Mar 2, 2012 01:19 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2013 03:49 |
|
|
gimpsuitjones posted:Buy some waratahs, they're like 6 bucks each. 2 per plate, a sledgehammer and some No8 wire and you can hang targets wherever you want Some guy is coming to buy my chickens, so I'll take the warratahs out of the chicken run once he's gone, but that might be after the shooting. We normally use electric fence standards and miscellaneous twigs.
|
| # ? Mar 2, 2012 03:07 |
|
|
1500mm
|
| # ? Mar 2, 2012 06:11 |
|
|
charliebravo77 posted:I bought Shooter, seems worth the money. Seconding Shooter. Great app.
|
| # ? Mar 3, 2012 22:51 |
|
|
What's the consensus on bolt-action vs semi-automatic rifles? Is it mostly a matter of cost or are high end bolt-actions significantly more accurate than high end semi-automatic rifles?
|
| # ? Mar 3, 2012 23:17 |
|
|
NovemberMike posted:What's the consensus on bolt-action vs semi-automatic rifles? Is it mostly a matter of cost or are high end bolt-actions significantly more accurate than high end semi-automatic rifles? Maybe a can of worms, but dollar for dollar I believe you're going get more accuracy and precision with bolt action over semi auto any day. Besides, for real long range shooting, the time spent between each shot makes the semi auto advantage pretty moot.
|
| # ? Mar 3, 2012 23:27 |
|
|
NovemberMike posted:What's the consensus on bolt-action vs semi-automatic rifles? Is it mostly a matter of cost or are high end bolt-actions significantly more accurate than high end semi-automatic rifles? In the cost department: You can get a very accurate bolt-action for under $700. The cheapest semi-auto that comes anywhere close in mechanical accuracy is an accurized AR-15 (in .223 or 6.5 Grendel) or AR-10 (in .308, 260, or 6.5CM), and those will run you around $1,500 for a quality rifle. Ultimately, a bolt action has the most potential for accuracy as well. That's why bench rest shooters use them. There are still some very accurate semi auto rifles out there, though, if you have the money.
|
| # ? Mar 3, 2012 23:54 |
|
|
How do bolt-action guns fare in the customization department, though? If I buy an AR-15 I can get different gas-systems, stocks, grips, barrels etc. and even change to different calibers relatively easily. Would it be possible to buy two bolt-action rifles in, say, .22 and .308 and have a decent level of part compatibility between them?
|
| # ? Mar 4, 2012 00:50 |
|
|
NovemberMike posted:What's the consensus on bolt-action vs semi-automatic rifles? Is it mostly a matter of cost or are high end bolt-actions significantly more accurate than high end semi-automatic rifles? I can't have anything semi-automatic in anything above .22.  . That said, I've found bolt actions more useful in longer range small game hunting that semi-automatic rifles. That's just my opinion of course, and given that I'm a filthy student I'm used to finding out that I'm wrong.
|
| # ? Mar 4, 2012 00:54 |
|
|
NovemberMike posted:How do bolt-action guns fare in the customization department, though? If I buy an AR-15 I can get different gas-systems, stocks, grips, barrels etc. and even change to different calibers relatively easily. Would it be possible to buy two bolt-action rifles in, say, .22 and .308 and have a decent level of part compatibility between them? You could put them in similar style stocks and the same scope on each for commonality. Parts compatibility isn't needed beyond that.
|
| # ? Mar 4, 2012 00:54 |
|
|
Trip report for our first time out with plates. In the past we've used paper or white sheet metal sides of computers. Weather report: EXTREME WINDS.  Our shooting position: from one hilltop over to the next. 170 metres (by GPS) to the closer target. Further one is about 200.  Plates, fence standards, wire.  On the left markoshark used 5 - 10 rounds .243 (big group in bottom left), 2 rounds of 7.62x54R (only one hit), and multiple rounds of 7.5xCuckooclock which the ground behind the target regrets. On the right is five rounds .243 from yours truly. The other targets received varying doses. We even managed to land 2 rounds of .22LR on the large target at 170 metres, which caused a smallish smudge. Not sure where the other 78 rounds of .22LR went. Meet the locals:  
|
| # ? Mar 4, 2012 21:45 |
|
|
NovemberMike posted:How do bolt-action guns fare in the customization department, though? If I buy an AR-15 I can get different gas-systems, stocks, grips, barrels etc. and even change to different calibers relatively easily. Would it be possible to buy two bolt-action rifles in, say, .22 and .308 and have a decent level of part compatibility between them? The modularity and after market support for some bolt guns (the Remington 700 comes to mind) may not be as insane as the AR family, but it's up there. We are starting to see multicaliber bolt guns (FN Ballista off the top of my head) that can go from 308 to 338 with a barrel/bolt swap. But nothing from .22 to .308 to my knowledge. If you're really into ARs, there's nothing wrong with that. A well made AR, with good glass, decent ammo and a good shooter can be pushed really far. Semi's dominate at closer ranges where multiple target engagement is likely. This makes them popular for varminting and multi gun 'tactical' competitions.
|
| # ? Mar 5, 2012 02:53 |
|
|
Flanker posted:We are starting to see multicaliber bolt guns (FN Ballista off the top of my head) that can go from 308 to 338 with a barrel/bolt swap. But nothing from .22 to .308 to my knowledge. If he wants caliber change then he wants something from Desert Tacitical arms.
|
| # ? Mar 5, 2012 04:02 |
|
|
Atticus_1354 posted:If he wants caliber change then he wants something from Desert Tacitical arms. It's not actually that important, it's just a bonus that you can get a .22 upper for an AR-15 and have a plinking gun with the same ergonomics. What I'm actually looking at is a Savage 11, it seems to hit a nice price/quality level.
|
| # ? Mar 5, 2012 04:30 |
|
|
NovemberMike posted:It's not actually that important, it's just a bonus that you can get a .22 upper for an AR-15 and have a plinking gun with the same ergonomics. What I'm actually looking at is a Savage 11, it seems to hit a nice price/quality level. I just purchase a Savage 111 Hunter (no accutrigger/stock). I suspect its a good value but I'd like to hear how to make it better.
|
| # ? Mar 5, 2012 05:43 |
|
|
loud-bob posted:I just purchase a Savage 111 Hunter (no accutrigger/stock). I suspect its a good value but I'd like to hear how to make it better. Timney trigger, macgowan/shilen/hart prefit barrel, nonshit stock.
|
| # ? Mar 5, 2012 06:01 |
|
|
Effortpost commencing. My Goal/New Years gun resolution this year was to get a good precision/hunting rifle. Budget was, eh, slim, but I shopped around, carefully. My unfortunate reality for the time being is that either on a range or out hunting, it's very unlikely that I'll take a shot past 300yd. But I really don't feel like lugging my FAL around (it wouldn't be suited to the task, it's military accurate) and my state's hunting regulations call for .24 caliber or above for hunting deer, nixxing the AR. Since I don't (yet) reload, and since I won't be regularly reaching out to 1000+ yards, I picked the .308, despite the general dislike of it in the last Long Range thread. The variety of factory loads out there is staggering and when I do get into reloading, components are easy to come by. I can also find .308 in almost any store that sells any sort of ammo, even in the middle of nowhere, Kansas. I looked at some Howas and Savages, but in the end really took a liking to the Remington 700 AAC-SD model. I know, the Remingtons were recommended against as well, for a variety of reasons that, again, I'm not trying to customize this rifle to shoot a relatively wildcat round out to 1000 yards. I handled several rifles in local stores as well, and I really prefer the feel of the 700 action and trigger. So I bought one.  I of course added my own scope mount (and bipod). I think what attracted me most about the AAC model was the 20" fat barrel, the threads obviously, but also the 1:10 twist, as opposed to a more typical 1:12 or 1:11.25. This is plenty ideal for stabilizing heavy loads (apparently up to the 220+gr territory which is nuts) with the impetus being for subsonic loadings as well. The Adjustable X Mark trigger isn't bad at all, to me. Of course this is probably because I simply don't know any better, but to me it's pretty drat crisp and light, still at its factory 3.5lb setting. I know for a fact that a good aftermarket trigger will beat the pants off this one, but truthfully I can see shooting it for a while. The hogue stock, as expected and advertised, is trash. The rubber coating just feels gross to me and the forend flexes embarassingly bad. I mean really bad. That's ok though, the meat and potatoes of this post is how I fixed that.  The scope I've chosen for now is a Millett TRS-2. 10x50mm with a mildot/bar reticle, and .1mrad clicks on the turrets. I really fingerbanged one of these at a Bushnell factory outlet store and I'm very impressed. The side focus wheel is pretty large and easy to use, and it's what made me choose this model over the Bushnell Elite 10x40 (didn't like the lack of variable focus other than the difficult-to-adjust eyepiece). The turrets have crisp, deliberate clicks, and they have a ring at the base of the turret that you tighten down so that they don't go getting "accidentally" adjusted. Neat features in a pretty economical scope. Truthfully I can't wait to put it to its paces later this week when I get to the range. Moving forward, I got the gun and scope about 3 weeks ago, and over the last couple of weeks I got some neat packages from Brownells and UncleCaveman.  Brownell's Bolt Rifle Playset! Including the TPS rings pictured with the scope above, a cleaning rod bore guide, Coyote AlumaHyde, Flush Cup QD Swivels, Devcon Bedding Compound, and Aluminum Pillars!  I bought this Boyd's unfinished Laminate stock from UncleCaveman for a screaming-out-loud deal. The picture above is basically from the night it showed up and I, like a kid on christmas, destroyed the packaging and mounted it to the rifle right away. Already I could tell that the wood compressed after putting any amount of torque on the action screws, because it was very easy to get them so tight they'd lock the action up. I also noticed the baseplate to the magazine didn't quite fit right. All fixable issues in a stock WAY better than the hogue, which I plan to sell to some redneck knucklehead for $150. BEDDING Anyone not familiar with pillar bedding is probably in the wrong thread, but for the uninformed, it is a process of installing aluminum tubes into the stock for the action screws to torque against (instead of compressing the wood) as well as fitting the inlet of the stock perfectly to the underside of the rifle action with a very hard epoxy. It also assists free floating the barrel, which is a good thing. I've been researching this for a few months now and I feel that anyone with even the most basic tools can do it. I attacked this with the basic tools needed to take the gun apart (allen keys and wrenches for the scope and such) along with a corded drill and a dremel. OK, first step is to get some tape on the action and make sure it is level in the stock. I cut tape around the front, sides, and bottom of the recoil lug to give it just enough clearance in the final bed to be easy to remove.  Next, with thicknesses of tape, I taped the barrel in two points until I was comfortable with how level the action was  Next, I started taping up the outside of the stock where the bedding compound will ultimately squeeze out. This really really really helped come cleanup time.  Keeping the actual inlet clean, of course. The tape in front of the recoil lug is to aid in cleanup and help me preserve a fully floated barrel.  Next, I drilled out the holes for the pillars  And test fit the pillars:   They stick out about .15-.2 inches in the bottom inlet. That's ok, we'll get 'em cut down in the cleanup process. Since I got Flush Cups, I figured I'd install them while I had a bunch of bedding compound mixed up:     Hole -> Test Fit. Looks good! This is one of the most important parts of the entire process, prepping the receiver. If this is done carelessly you'll either have a bad bed, or a stock permanently attached to your action. Wax is used as a release agent. In this case I used Kiwi neutral shoe polish, but there are other waxes gunsmiths use like Johnson's floor wax, 100% carnauba wax, or specifically branded stuff like Brownell's Acra Release. The receiver is coated with a liberal amount of wax and then polished, before clay is packed into the small areas where we don't want epoxy.   I chose play-doh for this because it eventually contracts when it dries making removal a breeze. it was also 48 cents at wal mart when I was buying mountain dew. Another coat of wax was applied over the clay and polished down. With as much prep work done as possible, time came to mix up the epoxy and get the action in the stock. I was pretty concentrated on details during this stage of the process and as a result have few pictures, which aren't great pictures because this was the "poo poo or get off the pot" moment of the ordeal and I was getting nervous. The epoxy is mixed 2.5:1 by volume  and stirred for quite some time until it reached a uniform color and has the consistency of peanut butter  Holy poo poo this stuff is sticky and messy and gets everywhere. Once the epoxy is mixed, the bedding train has left the station and I didn't get photos of this part, so I'll just describe it. I smeared the ALL OVER the tops of the aluminum pillars then bolted them to the action. I smeared the epoxy all over the inlet of the stock, focusing on the recoil lug area, working the epoxy around to minimize bubbles and gaps. I made sure an even and thick coating was all over all of the contact points. Right before dropping the action into the stock, I smeared more epoxy all over the outsides of the pillars. Then, in she went. I applied even and gentle pressure around the receiver to ensure it sat properly, which it did, and then started policing up all of the runout. Q Tips, WD40, Paper Towels, Popsicle Sticks, and a razor blade were very handy for this. Here's the first picture afterwords, about 20 minutes after going in and the initial cleanup done.  A drat shaky picture, I know. Nerves were really getting to me at this point, I'd just put my new rifle into a bunch of permanent glue and hoped VERY HARD that I didn't just stick it permanently to a new stock, or cause awful voids and bubbles and have to do this all over again. After a couple of hours I cleaned up the seams of the epoxy and was able to remove the tape. I was getting more and more confident about this and I think the Rye Whiskey really helped with that.  After a few more hours (about 4.5 or 5) I was able to break the action free. I did this very carefully, apparently most gunsmiths just whack the barrel on their bench or with a mallet, but I tried to apply even vertical pressure against the receiver, doing so with a small hammer and dowel rod through the pillars with light but firm taps. Sumbitch came right out.  I started doing cleanup work around the edges, again like a kid on christmas, before remembering to take a picture. So this picture is after a bit of initial cleanup. There's a void right under the ejection port, and a chip on the left side of the tang, but other than that, I'm extremely pleased with the way it came out. Edges were cleaned up with a small sanding drum in my dremel.  Oh yeah, I bedded the scope rail too. The rear of the rail left a gap over the rear of the receiver so while the gun was waxed up and I had the epoxy mixed, I slathered some onto the back of the scope rail and installed it only with the front two screws. It also came out nicely.  Flush cups came out too,  Biggest thing left was to cut the pillars down. Most gunsmiths would use a mill (or cut the pillars down beforehand in their lathe) but I don't have a mill (or lathe) so I used a dremel.  This "multi purpose cutting attachment" basically turned my dremel into a little router. I also got the carbide high-speed cutting bit, and had a  mill for about $23.I have to say, it worked REALLY WELL.    Using the same router-esque attachment, and a diamond grinding cylinder bit, I went around the edges of the magwell area where I'd had contact issues before    And with that the bedding process is completed! I do need to apply a finish to the stock which was what the Alumahyde was originally for, however, I'm torn at this point because the stock is starting to grow on me, so I may apply BLO instead. Either way, this rifle is solid as hell and I will have a trip report after shooting it later this week. 
|
| # ? Mar 19, 2012 16:46 |
|
|
Excellent writeup, glad the stock is working out for you! Now to do the same to my Vanguard. 
|
| # ? Mar 19, 2012 17:37 |
|
|
Uncle Caveman posted:Excellent writeup, glad the stock is working out for you! Now to do the same to my Vanguard. Good luck! Post the results if/when you do bed that thing. I'd be happy to answer as many questions about the process as I can, I found the whole thing to be surprisingly straightforward and now I'd be comfortable doing it again, several times. Maybe I'll bed the forend on my 870 or comedy option bed my AR's upper receiver to its lower receiver.
|
| # ? Mar 19, 2012 17:49 |
|
|
I love the feel of Hogue rubber and if it came in a spray can I would cover everything I own in it.
|
| # ? Mar 19, 2012 17:59 |
|
|
bunnielab posted:I love the feel of Hogue rubber and if it came in a spray can I would cover everything I own in it. Wanna buy a riflestock?
|
| # ? Mar 19, 2012 18:04 |
|
|
I'm left handed, sorry. I really do wish they made better stocks with that coating. Or that the slip on handgun grips they sell were small enough to fit on screwdrivers and wrenches.
|
| # ? Mar 19, 2012 19:03 |
|
|
I once sprayed my 10/22 stock with aerosol Plasti-Dip, which felt pretty much exactly like Hogue's rubber coating. Perhaps my surface prep was simply lacking, but it rubbed off within a few weeks.
|
| # ? Mar 19, 2012 21:41 |
|
|
I am looking to hunt moose. The problem is, I have no idea about what kind of glass I should be getting. Ideally I want to be 2-3 hundred meters out. The rifle I plan on buying is a Remmington 700, because I know they make it left-handed. I was told 3-9x40 is the size I should be looking at, but I don't know what brands fare out better than others. My price range is up to 1000 for it though.
|
| # ? Mar 19, 2012 21:46 |
|
|
My Spirit Otter posted:I am looking to hunt moose. The problem is, I have no idea about what kind of glass I should be getting. Ideally I want to be 2-3 hundred meters out. The rifle I plan on buying is a Remmington 700, because I know they make it left-handed. I was told 3-9x40 is the size I should be looking at, but I don't know what brands fare out better than others. My price range is up to 1000 for it though. 1k budget for just the scope, or for the gun and scope together? Leopold, Bushnell, Nikon, Nightforce, Swarovski and all the major optics makers have good choices. Decent optics will cost you at least $200, but there are a lot of good options that open up in the $400 price range. Almost all of the major optics manufacturers have really good warranties. I love my Bushnell Elite 4200 3-9x40, but I would just go compare side by side similar models at retailer, you are really looking for low light transmission and anti-fog characteristics in a hunting optic.
|
| # ? Mar 19, 2012 22:43 |
|
|
Flatland Crusoe posted:1k budget for just the scope, or for the gun and scope together? 1k for the scope. However that is the very maximum and I would prefer cheaper than that. I also really don't know what I should be looking for in side to side comparisons. I wouldn't mind something with tritium, but I think it's safe to assume those ones are pretty pricey
|
| # ? Mar 19, 2012 23:11 |
|
|
My Spirit Otter posted:1k for the scope. However that is the very maximum and I would prefer cheaper than that. I also really don't know what I should be looking for in side to side comparisons. I wouldn't mind something with tritium, but I think it's safe to assume those ones are pretty pricey If you keep an eye on the marketplace over at snipershide you can find some outstanding deals on used glass. One of the guys that I shoot with just got a Nightforce NXS for $1K shipped. It was covered in Krylon but that comes off pretty easily.
|
| # ? Mar 19, 2012 23:42 |
|
|
stik posted:If you keep an eye on the marketplace over at snipershide you can find some outstanding deals on used glass. One of the guys that I shoot with just got a Nightforce NXS for $1K shipped. It was covered in Krylon but that comes off pretty easily. Thanks for the tip
|
| # ? Mar 20, 2012 00:14 |
|
|
Action Jesus posted:That was really, really amazing & helpful. Thanks for all of the info; it should help me going forward into my new hunting rifle build I'm planning on starting this summer.
|
| # ? Mar 20, 2012 01:02 |
|
|
My Spirit Otter posted:1k for the scope. However that is the very maximum and I would prefer cheaper than that. I also really don't know what I should be looking for in side to side comparisons. I wouldn't mind something with tritium, but I think it's safe to assume those ones are pretty pricey I will never stop someone from spending more money on glass, but I would recommend something in the $400-$600 for a 3-9x40 scope. The more expensive scopes usually have bigger objectives, Adjustable focus and really specialized reticles or turrents with lots of adjustment. If you are shooting out to 300 yards you are looking at a few inches of drop totaling maybe 3 MOA. With a 12-18" vital area holding dead on will still result in a kill shot without any adjustment. 3-9x40 are the most common scopes and the price usually reflects that, you will get a lot of scope for the money relative to an obscure benchrest or tactical set up. I would look at Leopold VX-3 ($480) Zeiss Conquest ($500) Swarovski Z3 ($750) Trijicon Accupoint ($780) for illuminated reticle Bushnell Elite ($350)
|
| # ? Mar 20, 2012 02:05 |
|
|
Can anybody point me to some instruction on how to use your arms when shooting prone using a bipod and rear bag? My non-trigger arm is getting fatigued after just a few minutes or so of shooting. It's mostly the bicep but to some extent the forearm. I've got the arm perpendicular to the gun, and I'm positioned "straight behind" the rifle. I'm using this arm to support most of my body weight (the part that's off the ground, anyway), so my trigger arm is fairly relaxed. The problem is exaggerated when I'm having to squeeze the rear bag more than normal if I'm out of position relative to the bipod height.
|
| # ? Mar 20, 2012 22:16 |
|
|
You shouldn't have any tension in your arms so they shouldn't be getting fatigued, weight should be evenly on both elbows.. hard to troubleshoot someones shooting position over the internet
|
| # ? Mar 20, 2012 23:23 |
|
|
I'm no gimpsuit, but when I'm shooting prone with a bipod or a rest, my non-trigger elbow is on the ground, and my arm is tucked under my chest. I put my non-trigger hand beneath the stock and use it for elevation correction.
|
| # ? Mar 20, 2012 23:40 |
|
|
GroovinPickle posted:Can anybody point me to some instruction on how to use your arms when shooting prone using a bipod and rear bag? My non-trigger arm is getting fatigued after just a few minutes or so of shooting. It's mostly the bicep but to some extent the forearm. As GSJ said, there shouldn't be any tension in your muscles. You should be using your bone structure to support the rifle. Put equal weight on both elbows just like you're laying on your stomach without a rifle.
|
| # ? Mar 21, 2012 00:11 |
|
|
Or just get so fat your elbows can't reach the ground when you lay flat.
|
| # ? Mar 21, 2012 00:24 |
|
|
Propagandalf posted:Or just get so fat your elbows can't reach the ground when you lay flat. Or lift weights until your pecs prop you up into a perfect shooting position.
|
| # ? Mar 21, 2012 01:28 |
|
|
Look at changing your body position, lowering the rifle, changing rear bag maybe Also what sort of physical shape are you in
|
| # ? Mar 21, 2012 03:02 |
|
|
I'm not in great shape, but also not a total fatass. Six feet, 180-185 pounds. And the funny thing is, as a righty who shoots long guns lefty, this non-trigger arm is the stronger of the two. I really think it's a matter of technique but I can't quite pinpoint it. I think a change in rear bag is definitely something to look at. I've got another one that should work.
|
| # ? Mar 21, 2012 03:11 |
|
|
Does using a flash hider/compensator or thread protector cause any appreciable change in accuracy compared to a non-threaded barrel?
|
| # ? Mar 22, 2012 03:01 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2013 03:49 |
|
|
Only if it's not threaded/fitted correctly
|
| # ? Mar 22, 2012 03:26 |
|
