April 08, 2001 - April 14, 2001

Ya - can you see one of those anacondas coughing up a ghillie fur ball after a good sniper team lunch :)

Ken
ken hunter <hunterkr@riflemen.net>
Nokesville, Va, USA - Sunday, April 08, 2001 at 01:17:49 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.233.164.10)

"Pheronal state"? Will penicilin cure that?
 

Bolt <reeldoctor@mindspring.com>
NC, USA - Sunday, April 08, 2001 at 01:46:06 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.50.55.252)

How much extra weight does the can add to the M/AR? I have a 20" barrel and would think the CofG would be adversly affected.

I can see the utility in a CQB sit but how about longer range accuracy?

Since dealing with the "distasteful" ones (as Boomhauer says) is part of the deal, is the can the only thing they are interested in or are you required to detail the weapon(s) it will go on also?

Moe
Moe Mensale <mjmensale@aol.com>
Boca Raton, FL, USA - Sunday, April 08, 2001 at 02:49:56 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.195.182)

Ghillie furballs - Snipers, They're not just for breakfast anymore!
 
 

peteR <PNGREIFF@AOL.COM>
BIG CITY, BY-GAWD, USA - Sunday, April 08, 2001 at 03:12:29 (ZULU) (your host address: 205.188.193.167)

Been up in the shop loading Mouse Gun ammo. One load for my bolt gun and the other to try in my CQB gun. I want to see what the M-4 will do with 69 grain Sierra's and the fast twist barrel. Will report back provided I can get to the range, on the 'morrow.

Supressed .223 and others... Phil Daters M4-96D is state of the art. Have used a number of them and all perform well. NOTE: they must have proper mounts or threads. Have Gemtech do the work!
Last year I watched a show off MELT the internals out of a competitor's can. We were wondering what the silver shit was going down range. Idiot managed to aluminum "solder" the unit to the rifle.
If you're looking at cans and they have aluminum baffels or internals pass on them. May work for SMG's, but not for rifle calibers!

All my subguns have supressors. I love them. The MP-5 uses Gemtech's Raptor. What a honey. Adds 10 ounces or so and does not effect the balance of the weapon the way the SD version does. Nor does it bleed energy effectively making the 9mm a .380 ACP(if you're lucky).

My next acquisition is going to be a can for one of my .308's. Undoubtedly a GemTech product.

If your looking for subsonic 9MM, .223, and .308 try Engel Ballistic Research. NONE better.

Semper Fi,

Wes
Wes Howe <wsaa@proaxis.com>
Blodgett, OR, USA - Sunday, April 08, 2001 at 03:56:54 (ZULU) (your host address: 198.145.248.168)

Marius,
You were right, shoulda checked there first.

AR10 Steve

STEVE <skylar.burris@gte.net>
seattle, wa, USA - Sunday, April 08, 2001 at 06:06:13 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.36.222.46)

I'm taking Jim Owen's High Power class, and he gave us this numeric sequence: 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6. As he tells it, leave off the first '2', as that gets you from zero to 100 yards. The remaining numbers are come-ups between 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 700, 800, 900, and 1000 yards.

(To go from 100 to 200, come up 2. To go from 200 to 300, come up another 3. To go from 300 to 400, come up another 3. And so on and so forth through the numeric sequence.)

Sounds too simple, I thought. Way too simple. So, I checked the 30-06 BDC dial on my LR-M3, and dang it all if his numbers don't match that BDC dial, or no more than +/- 0.5 MOA at any given range.

Sorry if y'all knew this. I thought it was a pretty elegant way of remembering.
 

MikeL <mlitscher@wi.rr.com>
Brew City, WI, USA - Sunday, April 08, 2001 at 07:26:38 (ZULU) (your host address: 65.25.160.112)

Ref: IMI Match Brass

I was just reading about IMI Match brass and the high pressure signs etc. I've had exactly the same experience. 168 BTHP w/42.1 grains of IMR4895 gives 2,600 fps. Any more and things get sticky. I've also seen the tell-tale ring developing. The sad part is I've got 500 cases will all the work done to include neck turning. Oh well live and learn. I'll shoot these up and move on to Federal brass.

FWIW, I've never had any luck feeding truncated cone .45 bullets in any of my government models. I stick to the 230 FMJRN. Good enough for government work.

I'm going back to bed now.
 

Kevin R. Mussack (Andy's Dad) <kmussack@aol.com>
Clifton Springs, New York, USA - Sunday, April 08, 2001 at 13:53:10 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.195.196)

Another ghillie for sale on EBAY.

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1131132566
Bolt <reeldoctor@mindspring.com>
NC, USA - Sunday, April 08, 2001 at 14:05:26 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.50.54.121)

I had recently bought a Butler Creek Carbon Fiber Barrel for my 10/22 to test. Here is what I have found out from it. The Carbon fiber barrel coupled with a hogue ruber overmolded stock is too light for long range 22 shooting (50-100 yards) The entire packaged only weighed about 3.5 lbs. The rifle seemed to have a good ballance, there was more weight in the but of the stock then there was tward the barrel so that weight was canceled out by putting the rifle to my shoulder.
The hogue ruber overmolded stock has some flex in the forarm (which can be expected with a synthetic stock, but this fex coupled with the barrel prouduced inaccuracy. The steel is only a thin sleave for the bulk of the barrel covered by a carbon fiber composite. This thin steel alows for the barrel to flex. So when the rifle is put onto sandbags the forarm flexes slightly in turn flexing the barrel. Before I discovered the problem I had noticed that I was only able to obtain roughtly .75" groups at 60 yards. After discovering the problem and compensating for it by putting the rest just infront of the recever I was able to obtain almost 1/3" goups. This problem prevents me from putting a bipod on the rifle (which is one of the things I wanted to do). I am sending this barrel back for a green mountain fluited bull. I already have a marlin 70P (papoose) that is a good close range .22 at a fraction of the cost this one would be. I have heard that others have had problems with there carbon fiber barrels from other producers (Remington etc) I believe that this could be a problem for them also and prevents them from obtaining good groups, but I havnt checked any other carbon fiber barrels so I cant be sure. The way I checked for barrel flex was by holding the recever and the end of the barrel and then pulling to see if the barrel flexed away from the stock.
I will update everyone when I get my green mountain barrel in as to its accuracy and ballance on the hogue stock. I am also going to be getting a titanium firing pin and claw extractor, possibly a liniar compensator like I had heard mentioned on here that disperces all the gasses infront of the muzzle.

take care
Charlie
Charlie <higgins_charles@hotmail.com>
J-Town, AR, USA - Sunday, April 08, 2001 at 15:53:08 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.191.254.236)

Two Shoes

Terry <tls8323@cs.com>
USA - Sunday, April 08, 2001 at 18:40:47 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.195.197)

Mark A. Smith <Windinmane@aol.com>
Lake Cormorant, MS, USA - Sunday, April 08, 2001 at 22:55:22 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.204.202)

I have the same trouble spelling, and make matters worse the words I can spell usually get typed wrong. When ever you get the info on those 77's let me know. My Stealth left for winchester last Friday to get the right twist barrel put on it. Winchester has been very straight up and professional as it looks like I got a .22-250 blank that got tossed in the .223 finish pile. So end of problem I hope.
 

Undude -

Slings and mittens arrived Friday. AWWWWWSOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and the extra large cuff size is a good fit.
 

Ken - Some times when I post, after entering the password with the initial required information the post will not go through as if the pass word were lost. Has anyone else had this happen? Probably just me but it has happened twice.
 
 

Later

Titan
Titan <hatherly1@home.com>
Michigan, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 00:53:53 (ZULU) (your host address: 24.4.252.150)

Gents,

Had a post on another private E-mail list that indicated the formula used in the Mil-Dot Master is incorrect and solves the problem of sloping shots/come-ups incorrectly. Erring on the low side and getting progressively worse as range increases. Author indicates he can prove it, mathematically.
 

According to Mike Brown, the author, it uses (cos theta)*true range in the formula.

Mike B. indicated the correct formula should be come ups for the true range*(cos theta).

Personally, the Mil-Dot master works for me well enough. Anyone else out there have a comment?

Can any of us shoot the difference? I'm all ears as he indicated the difference could be several MOA at long range.

Mike Brown did say that when his paper was done we'd get a copy to review. I can hardly wait...

Just stirring the pot on a Sunday eve...

Semper Fi,

Wes

P.S. No range time today. Trip to town for parts and spent most of the day under the hood of my Chevy truck...just a minor oops on my part that I had to correct.
Wes Howe <wsaa@proaxis.com>
Blodgett, OR, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 01:16:35 (ZULU) (your host address: 198.145.249.72)

Thanks
JG
JG <winterstick30@spazmail.com>
Moreno Valley, CA, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 02:06:43 (ZULU) (your host address: 12.72.162.216)

Mike B. indicated the correct formula should be come ups for the true range*(cos theta)."

So, rather than being A*B it is B*A?

You're pulling my leg, right?

CDC' <criscurt@isu.edu>
USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 02:11:39 (ZULU) (your host address: 134.50.253.13)

It's time to reorganize the family gun rack..This happens several time s a year as the seasons change. Deer rifles make way for upland guns in December..Now the turkey guns come out, as do the varmint guns for their annual zero checks in preparation for dogs and chucks. The only constants around the place are defensive pieces and my wifes garden gun[an old crackshot .22] over the kitchen door..This shuffling of stuff gives one the incentive to go through the safes and PM everything at least a couple of times a year..
 

outa here
Markwell <markwell@hardynet.com>
Mobile and rehabing in the Alleghenies, WV, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 02:11:49 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.92.148.33)

Two Shoes
Terry <tls8323@cs.com>
USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 02:14:19 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.195.191)

I also have had trouble posting..Sometimes it goes through and sometimes not...
 

outa here again
Markwell <markwell@hardynet.com>
Computer challenged un the Alleghenies, WV, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 02:26:02 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.92.148.33)

Don't be too hard on Mike B., He probably went to Public school and a Public University. No offense to anyone, but this is the goofy sort of un-math being taught now days. Lets hope no one asks him to mathematically model a spin drift calculation.( and before the incoming gets here, I can't do it either).

Wes - the Mildot master is close enough for me and I have used it up to 50 Deg inclination. I would say it is within a MOA of accuracy depending on your round, and can be fine tuned with a little work. Heck, a 30 deg temp change coupled with a Humiditychange and a little wind really screws up the mix. That is why data based on testing is soooooo important.

I am going to bed.

good night

Titan
Titan <hatherly1@home.com>
Michigan, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 02:27:39 (ZULU) (your host address: 24.4.252.150)

Mike L – Those figures are in FM 23-8 and TC 23-14. They are called “normal come ups” and work for only specific loads. They will not work on 300WM, or .338 Lapua or Mag, 7mm Mag or any other flat shooter or grenade launcher. They are for the 173/175 world at about 2600 to 2700. It is our count system and it works fairly well. The truth is that the real come up have .5 and .25 moa thrown in but what’s 3 to 5 inches among friends at those ranges?

Well have a test tomorrow with my students, their first in the course. I lucked out and got four shooters. Makes my life easier.

T – Got your e mail and am working up some ideas for you to consider. Do not know your range capabilities but so some may not work.

Rick

Rick <rbowcher@aol.com>
Fayetteville, NC, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 02:28:27 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.207.58)

CDC wrote:
"
Wes: "According to Mike Brown, the author, it uses (cos theta)*true range in the formula. Mike B. indicated the correct formula should be come ups for the true range*(cos theta)."

So, rather than being A*B it is B*A?

You're pulling my leg, right?

CDC'

Read it again. Say a slope shot at 1000 yards with a slope such that cos theta of 0.8. I'll guarandamtee you that

0.8*(comeups for 1000) is not equal to the comeups for (1000*0.8) yards. Drop is a function of the square (or higher power) of the range.

Try it for any bullet you like. The comeups for 800 yards will be lower than the correct comeup. Result - 6 oclock miss.

BMG Mike - aka Mike Brown
Mad Scientist In Training
Not an Engineer, but Please don't tell my boss!
BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
Austin, TX, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 02:31:59 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.123.14.101)

I would respectfully disagree with the term "wrong" (don't mean to sound like Bill Clinton!) as applied to the Mildot Master's method of calculating corrections for angle shooting.

The angle correction method used in this device is an approximation ONLY, as stated in the Owner's Manual. The "Cosine Method" can never be exact, and errors will increase as range and/or angle become greater.

This device is intended to be used with all calibers, so correcting for come-ups for an individual caliber is not feasible. Instead, the Cosine method was added to the Range scale in order to provide a close approximation. From a practical standpoint, very few situations will arise that call for a combination of extreme angle (greater than 30 degrees) and extreme range (past 500 yards).

I am adding (below) the section from the Owner's Manual that serves as an introduction to this subject. All, please feel free to contact me off-line if you have any comments or questions. I would be particularly interested in hearing form the gentlemen who emailed Wes, so that we can discuss this.

Sorry to burn the bandwidth, but for those of you who haven't read the manual, here goes:

"Range calculations (whether performed by a mildot reticle, a laser rangefinder or other means) are a measure of the line-of-sight distance to the target. Bullet drop figures are always expressed in terms of deviation from a horizontal trajectory."

"It is important to remember that bullet drop figures are not accurate if the shot is uphill or downhill. The effect of up or down slope increases with the angle of deviation from the horizontal and with increasing range."

"The range determination on such shots must be adjusted to enable a hit."

"If shooting uphill or downhill (for example, when hunting in mountainous terrain), the shooter must estimate the angle by which the shot deviates from horizontal, and reduce the estimated range accordingly. This "actual horizontal range" will determine the bullet drop."

"Please note that it does not matter if you are shooting uphill or downhill, the effect on bullet drop is the same. In either case, the actual horizontal range will be less than the estimated (line-of-sight) range, which means that the amount of bullet drop will also be less."

"It is imperative that the shooter realize that the two methods presented here are approximations only."

"While the Mildot Master is extremely accurate in calculating range to target and resultant MOA/Mil corrections (given an accurate target size estimation), these are strictly geometric functions based on line of sight measurements."

"The calculations necessary to exactly correct for shooting at angles other than horizontal are complex and time consuming."

"External factors as diverse as altitude, air temperature, and relative humidity can all affect the results of these approximations. This is because, in each of the two methods, the corrected bullet drop figure is based on a reduced "actual horizontal range" to account for the lessening of gravitational effect on the bullet's trajectory as the firing angle deviates further from the horizontal. The bullet's path through the air, however, is still at the (longer) "line-of-sight" distance, subjecting the bullet to slight additional air resistance not accounted for in these two approximation methods. Due to the effects of the above-mentioned factors on air density, it is impossible to simplify the calculations and incorporate them into these two approximation methods."

"If the shooter elects to use the Mildot Master for calculating corrections for uphill/downhill shots, it must be with the realization that the results are approximations. While close enough for hunting and target-shooting situations, the margin of error increases with range and angle and precludes the use of these methods in critical situations."

Hopes this clarifies things a bit.

Best Regards,

Bruce N. Robinson <bnrobins@flash.net>
Los Lunas, NM, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 02:37:28 (ZULU) (your host address: 209.254.238.32)

Bruce N. Robinson writes, among other things.

"The calculations necessary to exactly correct for shooting at angles other than horizontal are complex and time consuming."

Actually, the correction for drop on a slope shot is deceptively simple. If you know the elevation to put on the sights for a level shot at that range, then cos theta times that elevation puts the slope shot on target. Independent of caliber, bullet BC, or MV.

Your Mil-Dot slide rule does the Cosine multiplication math on range - it is not too great a leap to believe that the math can be done on the elevation.

I acknowledge that "wrong" may be harsh term for a method which produces approximately correct results. But it is demonstrably less accurate than the correction stated above. It may make the difference between a hit and a "Maxwell Smart" shot at long range/steep slope.

I'll offer to trade you a copy of my paper for a Mil-Dot Master (when I finish writing it - in a day or two). ;-)

Is there any way to put a .pdf document on the site here?

Regards

Mike

Mike
BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
Austin, TX, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 03:01:08 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.123.14.101)

Two Shoes
Terry <tls8323@cs.com>
USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 03:09:16 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.12.105.37)

Bruce writes "External factors as diverse as altitude, air temperature, and relative humidity can all affect the results of these approximations. This is because, in each of the two methods, the corrected bullet drop figure is based on a reduced "actual horizontal range" to account for the lessening of gravitational effect on the bullet's trajectory as the firing angle deviates further from the horizontal. The bullet's path through the air, however, is still at the (longer) "line-of-sight" distance, subjecting the bullet to slight additional air resistance not accounted for in these two approximation methods. Due to the effects of the above-mentioned factors on air density, it is impossible to simplify the calculations and
incorporate them into these two approximation methods."

I'm of the opinion that the air density factors (altitude, temperature, and to a much lesser extent, humidity) may not be too complex to put on a slide rule. Pilots have been using a slide rule calculation of density altitude for many years. Relating density altitude to drop may not be quite so straightforward, since it tends to be caliber-specific.

Michaelis (HTI) includes barometric and temperature correction coefficients in his tables. I'm at odds with the way he applies them, but they can be used to correct (at least approximately) for density effects on drop. The coefficients are raised to an exponent (based on altitude, or temp difference from 59F) and used to adjust the drop. These exponential calculations can easily be incorporated into a slide-rule type calculator.

Art Pejsa (Modern Practical Ballistics) has derived some formulas that effectively calculate an altered BC based on the density factors, and formulas that relatively straight-forwardly calculate drop based on MV and (altered) BC. Yes, I'm talking about more calculation at the firing point than is being done presently. They are probably not a 1-step operation on a slide rule.

In any case, the correct procedure is to apply the density corrections to the level shot drop data before applying the cosine theta correction.

Regards

Mike
BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
Austin, TX, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 03:21:56 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.123.14.101)

I'm afraid it's not as easy to directly apply a cosine multiplier to elevation adjustments on this device. It would necessitate the addition of a separate sliding member and thereby compromise its simplicity.

You can, however, perform this calculation, if you so desire, with the device in its current incarnation.

Let's say your calculated elevation correction is 12 MOA, and you are shooting at an angle of 30 degrees. Set the Range to 1200 (12 x 100) and read 1025 next to 30 degrees. Your corrected elevation is then 10.25 MOA.

I have doubts that this method will work for all situations, however. As an extreme example, let's look at a 90 degree shot (straight up). If your rifle is sighted in at 300 yds.your bullet path will be high for all shots between about 25 yds. and 300 on a horizontal shot. If you now apply cos theta (cosine of 90 degrees is zero) X elevation, your correction is zero MOA, which means a miss, because the bullet path is crossing the line-of-sight in order to be on target for that 300 yd. horizontal shot.

The calculations ARE complex, according to Louis Schwiebert, who produces the excellent Ballisticards. Lou works closely with contacts at Sierra, and he and I talk often and collaborate on some projects.

I would be very interested in reading your paper. If you would like to try my device out, there is a "virtual" version on my website, courtesy of Karin Christensen.

Bottom line is that correcting for angle shooting is an approximation, especially with a slide rule. If I could make this thing work 100% for all calibers under all conditions for all angles, I'd be a very wealthy man.

The Range and MOA/Mil calculations are exact. Ask the guys at Storm Mountain competitions (or at Leupold Technical Service).

Angle correction is not. Kinda like reading wind!

Best Regards,

Bruce N. Robinson <bnrobins@flash.net>
Los Lunas, NM, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 03:49:35 (ZULU) (your host address: 209.254.238.77)

Rick wrote "
Wes – On the gravity distance question. It will work under most circumstances. The problems come in at longer ranges. What gets left out is the lower strike caused by air resistance. The bullet really is traveling 750 meters even if you only put 550 on the gun. Hence you have an environmental effect of 750. That is where you read the winds and that is where you will get the low strike. The formula is quite complex and a royal pain. Will the Mil Dot Master work for most shots, yes and I proudly own one. Can you shoot the difference at the ranges and angles that it would make a difference, you darn tooten. Would you normally run into those situations, probably not. You would be in SWAG land anyhow.
:-)

Rick, I'm trying to take some of the SWAG out of SWAGland. What is left out of the "cosine range" approximation is the fact that this approximation is a fortuitous coincidence that has taken on a life of its own. The approximation can be shown to be *systematically LOW* at all ranges and all elevations except 0. Low enough to make a practical difference? Not at short range/low slope. Yes, the Mil-Dot Master is accurate enough for those conditions. The problem is that some authors and teachers have taken the method outside of that envelope.

If you are going to use an approximation, it behooves you to know the envelope inside which it holds. I'm beginning to believe that lots of people don't know it's an approximation. RTFM would be good advice to those people, I guess. Or maybe not.

The real problem isn't as complex as you think. Its solution can be demonstrated with a simple graph and elementary trigonometry. The figures in Plaster's book come close to revealing the answer, but he doesn't bother to analyze them. Pejsa does this analysis, taking a slightly different tack than I have, but I think my results are compatible with Pejsa's.

Mike
BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
Austin, TX, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 03:57:51 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.123.14.101)

BMG Mike,
Have you read the Archieves and Hot Tips & Cold Shots?

We been through this before, Both Bruce and Daves angle measurement goodies WORK as designed! They aren't designed for calculating nuclear payloads, or splitting genes for examination.

and I HATE (100pt FONT) Chalkboard games on the Roster!!!
just ask Dan...................
 

Its a bad (No)hair, and hayfever day, here in By-Gawd - ANY QUESTIONS?????

God help you if 'Lito is having one too!
 
 

peteR <PNGREIFF@AOL.COM>
BIG CITY, BY-GAWD, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 10:54:25 (ZULU) (your host address: 205.188.196.42)

There's a Mosquito buzzing in your position... you missed a very important comment that Rick made (in his typical, understated style)...
On extream angles, and long ranges... cos*come-ups are affected by the velocity factor...
Example... the 175SMK (BC ~ .510) at 2685 muzzle. At 600yds the remaining velocity is about 1700fps, and at 1200 yds it's about 1075fps.

If you took a shot at a steep angle where the true distance was 1200yds, and the horizontal component was 600yds (60 degrees I think, but no coffee yet)...
... you could not simply do cos60*come-ups, because the drop come-ups for 600 are based on a velocity of 1700, but your bullet is traveling at 1100.
You would need to use come-ups for a bullet that was traveling at 1100 at 600yds.
If you backwards-number crunch, you find... Voila, the BC for a bullet that would fit that profile is around .260.

Hence, for really accurate longrange, steep angle stuff, you have to do... cos*BC first, then run new come-ups, and then run cos*Ncome-ups.
HA!... no longer a 2" x 3" pocket card... not even a palm top... we're talking lap top here :((
Phooie!

Art Pejsa was hot in ballistics... about 20-15 years ago. There's much better stuff around now.

And at these long distances, the biggest enemy is... you got it... W-I-N-D.

Titan...
On bad spelling, and bad typing...
It's like that double negative thingie... as in "Don't never go there!"

If you spell badly, and type badly, stastically, you will have days that are fine...
... aend alsoe ue wil hav mour taht wiil have daz that ar treerabul ;))

No worries mate!

'lito
 

Pablito <condor@mags.net>
USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 11:30:18 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.106)

A while ago Andy's Tasco sniper scope went bad, so I got him a M3LR and sent the Tasco in for service. It was returned to me without explaination. I assumed it was repaired. Yesterday we went to the range to test it out. It still won't track or repeat. It is a POS! I'm sorry I ever wasted the money. This morning I pulled the Badger rings off and threw it in the trash. If you've got a good one, good for you, but be warned, this was a "good one" once.

Ref: Chucks

Yesterday at Andy's grandparent's place Andy looked out the window and then went for his rifle. Down back, just this side of the hedgrow was a woodchuck. That's one. The season has begun.

Kevin R. Mussack (Andy's Dad) <kmussack@aol.com>
Clifton Springs, New York, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 11:48:52 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.80.33.70)

Bruce, I have perhaps misspoken. Maybe comeups isn't the right term. The cosine correction applies to the total elevation, not the incremental elevation from a close range zero. The equation is correct (other than height of sight) at all angles when it is applied to the total elevation.

Boomhauer, I've no doubt that within the envelope that the MM master is appropriate, that you can't tell the difference between it and my correction. Do you know what that envelope is? Do you know what to put on your sights when you are outside that envelope? How many MOG do you take off? Or do you put them on? (That's Minutes of Guess). I'll not deny the usefulness of a spotter - but a first-shot hit is always better than an observed correction on the second shot.

peteR, I have read Hot Tips and Cold Shots. Gooch's article is the only one I find there. It merely advocates the MM correction method. I have not been all the way through the archive. I'm not talking about nuclear payloads - I'm talking about payloads in the 200 grain ballpark, at ranges beyond 600, where your elevation gets way above 20 MOA, and where it doesn't take much of a slope for the MM to give you a 5% or more error in elevation. MOAs start to get pretty big out there. How much el error are you willing to accept before you call it a miss? Just where does your MM fall apart? And how? If precision shooting is your goal, how many SWAGs are you willing to accept? I'd have thought that chalkboard exercises on some topics would be of interest to this audience. If not, perhaps this is the wrong forum for this discussion.

Titan - I am a product of public education, and without benefit of College diploma. Fortunately, I'm intelligent enough for these deficiencies to be little more than potholes in the highway of life. Fortunately for many of us, public education has not always been in the sorry state that it is in today!

Regards, all. Maybe I can get this paper out today or tomorrow, for your bedtime reading.
BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
Austin, TX, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 12:08:31 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.123.14.101)

I saw a lot a few days back about the 155 "Palma" bullets. I went up to the mountain yesterday and tried some of the Lapua Scenar 155 (reportedly .508 B.C.), the load I used was clocking 2900 fps. The software predicted 11.8 MOA up for 675 yards and 13.8 for 725 yards, I initially figured this was a little over optimistic but after firing these bullets in the actual test I was very impressed. The 155 Lapua Scenar appears to fly much flatter on the trajectory that the 175 Sierra I was comparing (175 Sierra @ 2650fps). (Try running the ballisics yourself for a check)

It was pretty windy, gusts to 18 or 20 mph with sustained in the 10 mph range, the Lapua showed 1 to 2 MOA less wind over the 175 also.

The B.C. on the Sierra 175 and the Lapua 155 are very close and the little 155 starts out 250 fps faster.

I'm still going to shoot them over the chrony at 100 yards for a B. C. calculation of my own but initially it appears the .508 reported is in the ball park.
 

Dave "Doc" King <David_L_King@Yahoo.Com>
Damascus, MD, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 13:31:35 (ZULU) (your host address: 131.158.166.157)

Deja Vu all over again, huh Pete?

CDC' <criscurt@isu.edu>
USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 13:38:38 (ZULU) (your host address: 134.50.253.13)

In an attempt to understand how the B.C. could be equal to higher on the Lapua 155 I compared some of the bullets characteristics.

The bearing surfaces were roughly equal but the Lapua appeared to be longer than the Sierra

The Lapua 155s were consistent in length while the Sierra 175s varied by about .015, the Lapua 155 SCENAR was still .035 LONGER than the longest Sierra 175 MK.
Dave "Doc" King <David_L_King@Yahoo.Com>
Damascus, MD, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 13:47:01 (ZULU) (your host address: 131.158.166.157)

Thank you for the article from American Gunsmith. Much appreciated!

Duman <steve_duey@hp.com>
Denver, CO, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 14:12:02 (ZULU) (your host address: 15.254.49.2)

I guess what I wanted to say is that I do a lot of long range shooting whenever I can and I have found that, "The longer the range the less the angle". I guess unless your shooting from on top of a ledge down into a valley you really don't have that much of an angle to worry about do you??

If I am in a tower shooting a 300yds then the angle is steep but if I am in the same tower and shooting at 800yds the angles is much less isn't it??? or am I missing something??

I also find that under field conditions I won't know the exact angle anyway and I use the SWAG method for that along with my wind call and my dials for that days conditions. I have found long range shooting is not and exact science by any means. We can both have identical guns and loads, put in the same data and probably will hit in a differnt spot, shooting at the same target. Not because we guessed or figured wrong but because of "Outside" factors that we can't control and change constantly.

Bruce never said his Mil Dot Master was perfect but I will. I think its the perfect tool for me and a lot of other guys who are a hell of lot better at this than I am. No, its not exact but it gets me to where I need to be and thats good enough for me. By the way I use it for 308s, 260s and 6.5x284s and it works for them all so what more can I ask???

This is not ment as a flame in anyway Mike, nor is it ment to discourage you. I am just stating that sometimes we get to into things like, spin drift, that have very little effect on the overall picture compared to other things like wind and range estimation. Its like asking someone what time it is and they tell you how to build a watch.(HA) Just my opinion and you know what they say about those!!!

Pat <mrbullet@hotmail.com>
USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 14:28:41 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.41.18.3)

'Lito - do i still qualify for the Statistical correct days if i never studied statistics?
 

Out,

Titan
Titan <hatherly1@home.com>
Michigan, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 15:42:52 (ZULU) (your host address: 24.4.252.150)

Titan
Titan <hatherly1@home.com>
Michigan, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 16:00:09 (ZULU) (your host address: 24.4.252.150)

"'Lito - do I still qualify for the Statistical correct days if I never studied statistics?"

Onle if youe spewl gud lik I are do ;))

'lito
 
 

Pablito <condor@mags.net>
USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 16:13:55 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.13)

I think I see now what you are talking about. Applying the cosine to elevation changes to a scope that is aligned exactly with the bore (a "zero-yard" zero, so to speak) would eliminate the scenario I spoke of in my previous post.

I have not run any numbers yet, and have to go into the city for a couple of meetings, but this evening I will sit down and give it a go.

I think that the gist of your argument could be described as follows:

Two components affect drop: gravity (constant over a horizontal path) and air resistance (affected by BC and velocity, which decreases over distance).

An elevation correction takes into account both factors, so if you dial up 25 MOA for 800 yards, you have taken into account both gravity and the air resistance for that particular cartridge.

Are you saying that applying the cosine to the 25 MOA accounts for the decreased effect of gravity and leaves the effect of air resistance unchanged? Whereas applying the cosine to the range does not take into account the difference between line-of-sight range and resultant differences in air resistance?

If so, I think you have something there. I am even more interested in reading your paper.

I am not sure how much you and I will agree on the practical impact (no pun intended) of the differences between the two mehods, but we won't know until we discuss it, will we?

Don't get the impression that this forum is resistant to discussion. A lot of us (myself included) react to new ideas (especially math-related) like Dracula to sunlight. When I first approached Gooch with the Mildot Master, his reaction was, "Oh, hell, another crackpot idea".

As to education: I was in charge of Electrical and Electronic Systems in the Quality and Product Engineering Department of an automotive manufacturer for over seven years. I have no Engineering degree. I have no college degree at all. What I did have was knowledge of the systems gained from 10 years of working on them. I managed just fine, and was amazed at how many PhD's couldn't find their asses with both hands.

Get that paper done and let's all have a look.

Best Regards,

Bruce N. Robinson <bnrobins@flash.net>
Los Lunas, NM, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 16:15:08 (ZULU) (your host address: 209.254.243.179)

Mike BMG, you might want to step out of it and wipe your boot.LOL

Seriously the Mildot Master has worked for me and many others for years now. You are much more likely to make an angle estimation or target size error than the device being off. Unless you factor in spin drift and the ambient erection of the squid. Much to do about nothing. But you obviously have a head about your shoulders so stick around.

Undude back to slings.
MikeMiller <Tactical@tacticalintervention.com>
Calif, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 17:22:52 (ZULU) (your host address: 205.188.196.33)

Now of course this is all in theory and may not work out that way in the real world but I do have some 155s and if I get a break in the weather I will go out and try them at 1000yds. I don't have any 175s but I shoot my 168s right at 2800fps and I will compare these two.

I have some 175VLD Bergers but I don't know how they would compare to the 175MKs. I may try them too just to see what they do in my 1-12 twist. Then compare them to the other two.
Pat <mrbullet@hotmail.com>
USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 19:23:35 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.41.18.3)

I've sent draft copies of my paper to those engaged beforehand, and to Marius. Maybe it will be better written than some of my posts here. If I've missed anyone who cares, contact me off-Roster if you really must have a draft copy. Maybe it will find a place here to become public.

Bruce Robinson wrote:

"Two components affect drop: gravity (constant over a horizontal path) and air resistance (affected by BC and velocity, which decreases over distance).

Let me correct a misconception here - and this may be the biggest reason for some of the confusion. Drop depends on time, and gravity. Period. Gravity always works downward, but can be resolved into orthogonal components at any convenient angle. That means "works as though two right-angle forces" combine to produce "Down".

The BC, MV, density, etc directly influence the time of flight to the target. But no matter what angle that target is at, if the time of flight is the same, the drop is the same. What is different is the direction that drop has with respect to the line of sight.

There's an "if" in the above paragraph that does not strictly hold, but for practical purposes it does. That's the constant time of flight to a target at range R. The time of flight is altered by the component of drop (gravity) that can be resolved in the line of sight. This component either speeds up or retards the projectile's progress to the target. For TOF in the 1 second range, we are talking about at most 32fps cumulative velocity, 16 fps average, times the sine of the el. angle. That will change the TOF by at most a few milliseconds. A few milliseconds more or less in a second will not change the drop by much - a few tenths of a percent at most.
- - - - -
"An elevation correction takes into account both factors, so if you dial up 25 MOA for 800 yards, you have taken into
account both gravity and the air resistance for that particular cartridge.
- - - - -
Here's that conceptual error again - forget air resistance!

"Are you saying that applying the cosine to the 25 MOA accounts for the decreased effect of gravity and leaves the effect
of air resistance unchanged? Whereas applying the cosine to the range does not take into account the difference between
line-of-sight range and resultant differences in air resistance?

Well, sort of. Since the air resistance doesn't influence the drop, its effect is unchanged ;-) If the time is the same, the drop is the same, and the time will be the same within a very small percentage less than 1% difference in a 1-second TOF.

The cosine-range method finds the drop at approximately

TOF proportional to (Cos^2 X * R^2), rather than the drop at TOF proportional to (R^2) * cos X

My paper gives a better derivation, and shows the cosine-proportional discrepancy between the two methods - hopefully clearly.

- - - - - -

Titan - I share your distaste for the state of public education in this country. No (lasting) offense taken! As long as I have been around shooters - and that's a lot of years now - I have learned that you can't be thin-skinned and hang with this bunch.

As to A*B not equal to B*A - that was poor parenthesizing - either on my part, or on Wes's. When I re reread Wes's post (I didn't stutter) I saw the confused statement. It may have been confused in my posts on the other forum - I'll re-read those, also.
- - - - - -
I'm going to let this set for a while while my (unwilling) reviewers do their thing.

Later

Mike
 
 

BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
Austin, TX, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 19:41:15 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.18.199.140)

May I borrow your carpet for a few minutes? ;-)

Seriously, the errors you speak of can be minimized by training and/or better equipment. The error that I'm addressing is systematic. No amount of training or equipment can eliminate the error introduced by wrong math. Math that is flawed in concept, not wrong in execution. Math that degrades with range and slope, just at the point where you need all the precision you can get.

Would you like to be able to do headshots at 1k? I'm not offering that, but I would observe that the only way that will happen will be to eliminate every source of error possible till those errors that remain are smaller than a head at 1k. I offer up one source of error for elimination.

I'm quite sure that the MilDot Master slope doper is a good and valuable tool. Under certain conditions. If you are always going to be shooting where these conditions hold, then you really don't need the improvement offered by my method, and I can stop wasting your time.

Do you know what those conditions are? I think I do, and how to compensate for them. If you already shoot as good as you will ever need to, then I'll quit bugging you and go find someone else's carpet.

If you do need that improvement, you can still use your MilDot Master to apply conceptually correct math to the situation. You'll just have to use it a bit differently.

Mike

BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
Austin, TX, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 20:27:23 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.18.199.198)

Do any of you have exact Mil Reticle measurements that give more detail than the FM´s. There has to be a way to Mil smaller stuff than 10 Mil intervals. What size are the hash marks, etc. ?

t

torsten <7.62@lasercon.de>
germany - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 20:29:11 (ZULU) (your host address: 193.159.89.196)

Wind + spindrift + the corolis effect + angle of dangle + not getting to range enough + factory rifle + factory ammo + a full moon = having to take a "swag" anyway, which I am getting really used to!

Where is that smart boolit I lost? Bolt out!
Bolt <reeldoctor@mindspring.com>
NC, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 21:09:51 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.50.54.117)

Got the draft and will look it over tonight, PROMISE. Please Send a copy to Dan (CDC)& 'Lito too. Theys number crunchers to the max.
 

Dan, :-)
 

"Doc", WOW!
Thanks for the data once again WE grow stronger. Pat M. will give us the wind drift stuff on them if things remain constant in SoDak.
 

"T"
Try Gooch and Master Rick on the M-19's, I thinks its in the archieves two years ago, but senility is taking its toll today.
 

Sir Wes, Little brown envelope arrived today LOOKS GOOD! More later.
 

Chao! [PS- Hayfever down, hair up from the AM :-)]
 

peteR <PNGREIFF@AOL.COM>
BIG CITY, BY-GAWD, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 21:41:51 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.12.102.39)

You also left out the anti-gravity effects due to the high rotational speed of a charged object.
 

MikeL <mlitscher@wi.rr.com>
Bravo Sierra, WI, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 21:45:45 (ZULU) (your host address: 65.25.160.112)

The other option is to shoot down into one of the 360 degree ranges. This would place the shooter and observers less than 100 yards from the bottle. I'm concerned that fragments from the cylinder may still pose a hazard at that range. Anyone with experiance in this area?
 

Cory Trapp <Cory_Trapp@email.msn.com>
Paulden, Az, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 21:56:47 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.86.140.51)

Compressed gas cyllinders are explosions looking for a place to happen. They have been known to fly for long distances if the neck fails, taking out brick walls etc in the process. Check out the scuba diving safety publications for history of such events.

I think I'd try to rig a collar around the neck with 3 chain/cable anchors going down to something well-attached to earth. That would minimize the chance of the tank becoming an unguided missile.

Mike
BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 22:04:22 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.18.199.124)

I've never tried the Sierra 155 Palma bullets so I have no load info on that bullet. The B.C. on the 155 Sierra is stated as .450 in the Sierra manual, the 175 Sierra is listed as .496 at 308 Win velocity. I never saw a reason to switch to a lower B.C. bullet.

BUT the Lapua 155 really caught my eye with that .508 (no stated velocity criteria) so I gave them a try. I tried VARGET but didn't get good velocity before things got a little sticky. The test I shot over the weekend was using FED 210M, new unfired LAPUA brass, Reloader 15 (max listed load and a little extra for my fat chamber) and the Lapua 155 Scenar. I'm going to try some additional powders when my next shipment of these 155s arrive.
 

Sinclair International has them in stock, or at least they did this morning.
 

Pat

Are you talking about the 155 Sierra or the Lapua?

Dave "Doc" King <David_L_King@Yahoo.Com>
Damascus, MD, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 22:27:12 (ZULU) (your host address: 12.78.126.146)

I got your paper and will give it a good read. But while we are at it take a look at what angle would make a significant difference at real world ranges and see where in the heck you would make that shot from. The only items that seem to be a potential for angle shooting are sky scrappers and that my friend can be solved by changing hides. You shoot to the top floor from another top floor. You shoot to the 72nd floor from another buildings 72nd floor. Take the elevator for the stalk. PPolice distances tend to be less than 200 yards and it will take a huge angle to make a difference. That difference is measured close enough with the MDM (MilDot Master)

In the field the distance is greater but the angles tend have less impact (30 degree at 50 yards is not much at 1000 yards, the amount of degree will fall off at range). Now consider factors that you may not have in the math is everything category. Wind up drafts and swirls are far more common and they cause up lifts of the round. Mirage causes the target to appear in a different place than it actually is. Amb. Temp has an everyday effect on the bullets. Elevation effects the flight. Ammo temp will effect performance. Hell I could name another two dozen or so.

The bottom line is I have used the Mildot Master in the field and find it to work very well. How mucgh time have you logged with it?

Bruce Robinson had his clothes on when he came up with the MDM and many have been able to use it very well ever since. The MDM is the best damm ranging item on the market!

I think I will go measure the fall angle of my next turd and check the BC.

Undude
MikeMiller <Tactical@tacticalintervention.com>
Calif, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 22:53:24 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.12.105.39)

Hey there, and good day to you sir.

I personally don't have any problems with your product, and there aren't too many other's around here that do either, from what I understand. When I first heard about it, it was here, being touted by one heck of a lot of the regulars here. I do not have one yet, but my financial situation is of no concern of yours. The point that I am making here, is that for your product to be in use by the USMC, and the patrons here, is a statement in itself, and defense is unnecessary.

Sorry, but the "shoulda, woulda, coulda theories," always follow what someone else (you) already did.

Continue on,

Bill Harding,

Thank you for the article from the American Gunsmith. The vice that I am building is almost finished, and I am incorporating some of "your" ideas, as well as a few of my own. You will have to get the "brews" from Bravo, but I will sure supply you with the "Jack Daniels". (I don't like beer)... waiting for incoming on that one, eh.

I will contact you off the roster, regarding a few other issues.

Out.
 

Sean <nailer@mackbc.com>
Mackenzie, B.C., Canada - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 23:46:13 (ZULU) (your host address: 204.244.197.58)

There are things that are part of the science of external ballistics that some find fascinating, and some find boring... and that's Ok.
Some of it will only come into effect under very controlled conditions, like the dreaded "Spin Drift".

I think it's important to have at least a cursory understanding, if for no other reason, that you don't sound like a dummy, in mixed company (the eggheads, ya' know;).

But, in reality, most of these effects are smaller that the major variables that we have to deal with, like wind, and accurate range estimation... and these are large enough, that the little guys gat lost in the mess.

When you settle in with your riffle, and see the wind blowin' in two different directions... and hard... you realize that you are dealin
' with 10 or 15 feet of hold off, 6" of spin drift all of a sudden, looks really small.
Do these little errors of "Spin drift" and cos*whatever effect whether you get a "Clank" or a "Miss"... I don't think so!

I have the mildot master... and it rocks. I can still hear those Clanks ;)

But it's fun (when it's raining, like now, cats and dogs... did someone say CATS ;))

'lito
 

Pablito <condor@mags.net>
Kevin's snow is gone... now it's MONSOON season, in the North East, USA - Monday, April 09, 2001 at 23:51:39 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.59)

Don't muck with the O2 cylinders! Bad ju ju! They can take out an 8" re-enforced concrete block wall and you have no idea where they will head when they take off. Kinda like a balloon that you let the air out of but about a million times more powerful. Wish I could think of the name of the safety education movie that I saw years ago and I would give you the poop on it.

Just assume that if there were 15 or 20 bad guys in front of it when it went off, they would look like mushy, bloody, yucky bowling pins when they finally hit dirt!

Hazmat and safety nut Bolt, out!
 

Bolt <reeldoctor@mindspring.com>
NC, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 01:36:17 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.49.119.87)

Lito – And now you see why I understate, to dam hard to state it fully, I leave that up to you guys that can I only shoot. :-)

T – The height of the bars is 5 mils and half the height is of course 2.5 mils. E holds for the width of the bars on the vertical scale. That is the best I can do for you man.

Bolt – Where in the hell is my SWAG anyway?

Bruce – You should of heard what I told Gooch when he mentioned your little card to me! :-)

Lito – Did you say cats and dogs again?

OK Mike you have taken a mauling from a bunch of us for your idea and you stayed with it. I have to respect that as many would have left in a huff. Also understand that many of us do this as a living and have done it for real. Is there a failure point with the standard base gravity formulas, yes. Will I still ring his chime at 600 to 800 yep! Will I have SWAGed it, YEP, NO ONE CAN READ WINDS TO PERFECTION. That in itself is SWAG land like it or not. :-)

Hold hard guys and keep Mike honest, he may be the one that comes up with the right way to do this crap after all!

Rick

Rick <rbowcher@aol.com>
Fayetteville, NC, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 01:43:46 (ZULU) (your host address: 205.188.193.182)

Cory: I've seen a cylinder go before, it can be as advertised: an unguided missile. Went through a steel welding table, cinderblock wall, across a (luckily unpopulated) parkinglot and through a sheetmetal wall. I've also seen them cut with det cord, it was "interesting".

Sean: I was in your shoes once, hated beer. Then I came to the amazing discovery that I DID NOT hate beer, I hated CHEAP beer! When I graduated, I swore that I'd had my last black label, pearl, schaefer, pabst, and the ever popular generic, (white can with "BEER" in black block letters!). To date, I've kept that promise. There's several thousands of different brands and recipies out there commercially, which means you gotta TRY some. Join one of those "around the world" beer clubs. Some are real sleepers (Akira from Japan), some are NASTY (no insult intended here Marius) like Mamba. But you'll find one that's prime. In my case, it was in a pub in Edinburgh, Scotland.

Got my keg of Varget today, gotta go check the mail for the other thing ;-)

Patron Mike: you got lucky last night. I found "the box". You'll have something in the mail ASAP, but you might want to forward me your address. Danged palmtop went dead a month or so ago, and I lost all kinds of contact info for everyone. Ah well, less for the FBI to get.
Boomhauer <Bravo762@yahoo.com>
Arlen, Texas, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 01:46:29 (ZULU) (your host address: 209.180.85.109)

LLoyd Mcpherson <lmcpher104@aol.com>
Terre Haute, In, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 01:52:00 (ZULU) (your host address: 205.188.196.36)

Don't mess w/ compressed tanks... it's asking for trouble, IMHO....
 

-L
 
 
 
 

Leslie <lnbright@naxs.net>
TN-VA, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 01:53:49 (ZULU) (your host address: 216.98.84.146)

You can find them on eBay sometimes, for around $40... they fit the 40mm AO objectives.

'lito
 

Pablito <condor@mags.net>
Kevin's snow is gone... now it's MONSOON season, in the North East, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 02:03:42 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.59)

Pat:

It's way too wet on your side of the state.. It rained about 2" in 5 hours at Dad's, coupled with the snow melt, it was gooey. Shot bow this weekend instead of rifle, can shoot bow inside.

PeteR:

I'm still trying to figure out the average 'breeze' calculations in South Dakota. If it would just blow one way at a time, it might not be so bad. Some days, I just turn the whole scope perpendicular to the barrel, and still 1/2 click to the left.

'lito:

What's your take on boattail vs flat base bullets? Is the drag rate reduced enough to make up for the loss of surface contact? I heard that Nosler Partitions, having a lead core and somewhat of a boat tail, dimple at the exposed lead when fired which creates a better seal and if used with bullet weights and lengths with higher BC's, would be premium longer range bullets.

.260 Rem:

I am starting to think the 6.5 mm bullet is too small a bore for the .308 case. It is a great medium round,I just don't think this round will meet the potential it should be reaching, I will admit that we have not chambered many 260's in the past 2 years, but the 140's in 7-08's are continually performing exceptionally better than the 6.5's. Maybe I've got to see it downrange. I would take a 6mm Remington over the .243(6-08) for the same reason. No flame 260 dudes!! just mining for answers!!

later

JR <jr_rcsd@hotmail.com>
rapid city, sd, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 02:04:02 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.34.14.24)

I've been reading through the archives, (which EVERYONE should do!) and what I was thinking of was in there. The item, and archive reference is:

From: jrf 
Date: 3. Jul 96 11:26
Tenebraex produces a Sunshade (Anti-reflection/ Anti-Glint) Filters
 

Sounds like a really nice product. I'd love to hear from anyone who has practicle, in the field experience with the ARD. Thanks for any insight!

Wolfgang <duncan_wolfgang7@yahoo.com>
Cleveland, Ohio, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 02:18:34 (ZULU) (your host address: 199.183.75.99)

I forgot to edit, so negate:

'I would take a 6mm Remington over the .243(6-08) for the same reason'

it was a different train of thought
 

JR <jr_rcsd@hotmail.com>
sd, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 02:25:24 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.34.14.24)

Tenabraex Corp makes them I believe.
"F" stop adapters are(were) from Leupold, or a good camera store (Lemay -Any ideas?)

Last time I played that game was drilling a 9mm hole in the center of a screw in metal cap on a Taaaaa, Taaaaas, TS-24x fixed for 10M airgun. Thats targeting a 1mm x-ring at 24X from standing shooting guyz.
I even have a pix of what it does to you..........hee-hee
 

Chao!
 

peteR <PNGREIFF@AOL.COM>
Big City, By-Gawd, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 02:28:18 (ZULU) (your host address: 205.188.196.59)

I know this is off the subject of what this website is designed for, but it is extremely important none the less.

The following website was forwarded to me by a shooting buddy in reference to the EP-3 crew being held in China. The site is for a petition in support of Rep. Tom Tancredo & Rep. Duncan Hunter's bill to revoke Permanent Normalized Trade Relations (PNTR)with China, HR 1467.

I urge each of you to "sign" this petition to show your support for our forward deployed service members.

Sgt Armin H. Wahl
USMC

Semper Fi
 

http://www.grassfire.net/4.asp?pid=801692&rid=234934
 
 

Armin Wahl <sgtwahl@yahoo.com>
Oxford, MS, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 02:32:46 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.89.160.30)

The seal issue is non existant. The size of the gas molecules are so small, that whether you have a boat-tail, or a flat base, the bullet/barrel junction lookes like the Grand Canon (times 1,000,000) to them, and the same amount will get through (if any DOES get through).
We did an interesting thing years ago... cut back a 30-06 barrel to 2" in front of the bullet nose, and fired a round into cotton batting.

The bullet had a big bulge in the middle of the body... the force on the back of the bullet (about 5000 pounds... REAL POUNDS, not psi), plus the inertia of the front of the body, causes the bullet body to swell, and press the sides against the barrel, so I don't think the gas leaks can be significant.

... and I would take the 6mm Rem over the .243 for the same reasons as you would ;))

'lito
 

Pablito <condor@mags.net>
USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 02:55:17 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.59)

BMGMike: I found some ways to increase my hit probability that really do work. If you search the archives you'll notice that I have almost completely stopped posting them. Sometimes I slip.
 

CDC' <criscurt@isu.edu>
USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 02:56:50 (ZULU) (your host address: 134.50.253.13)

Wolfgang...
The Tenabraex things are not what you were talking about.
Tenabraex makes two kinds of reflection supression... the cheapies that are marketed through Lupita, that are about 1/4" thick (optically poor), and the ones that Tenabraex sells themselves... about 1" thick, with bigger holes in the honeycomb... these are optically very good, but are very expensive.
These Tenabraex screens will do nothing for mirage at all, and the cheap ones from Lupita will degrade the image.

'lito
 

Pablito <condor@mags.net>
USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 03:16:05 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.115)

For those interested...I watched Mike in Tx shoot some 168 Amax's at 1000 and they are worth a serious try.

2 shoes...where ya at man?, the weather's tailor made right now.

Cheers, brand.
brand <brandx375@yahoo.com>
TX, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 03:50:10 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.193.186.57)

I know, don't rub it in.........I just put the finishing touches on "The Beast".

Looks like a real muther.........17#'s of it!!!!!((:

I'm planning on coming this weekend, lock up the chiddren, and the sheepies.

Mr. Mike, will have some tall tales to show, as well as tell....I'm sure.
Probably in the lab right now, workin' on cosines, and such........(;

Take care, see you soon.

For those who hit me offline on the IMI, there's an article in this months issue of "Precision Shooting".
Decent info.

Two Shoes
Terry <tls8323@cs.com>
USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 04:20:46 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.194.186)

What if the sides of the barrel were smaller than the bullet diameter?? Such as our barrels. And radiused at the intersection betweeen land and groove. The bullet would try to expand, but since the tight bore and smooth rifling junction (no sharp corners), would seal at the bearing surface of the body. Wouldn't more bearing surface be preferable?
 

JR <jr_rcsd@hotmail.com>
rapid city, sd, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 04:22:06 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.34.14.24)

I understand and respect that some of you guys are pros. That you can reliably pop a target - first shot - at long range X is admirable. Can you do it at X+100? X+50? If not, what are you doing to improve it? In my opinion, one of the qualities that makes one a pro is a constant quest for better performance. That's the way that progress happens.

I don't mean to belittle anyone on this board. I'm but an armchair sniper, and I can't count thousands of rounds of long range shooting. I get to shoot at long range about 3 times a year, and that only recently. I'm too damn old to hump the boonies or crawl in the mud. I've got plastic eyes that make iron sights almost impossible. On a good day, I'll get MOA groups at 200 - my local range capability. Nothing to write home about. On the other hand, there's not too much wrong with my brain. Yet! That's my story and I'm stickin to it!

My intent with this idea is not to eliminate SWAG (impossible!) - it is to reduce it. I have no idea how to reduce or eliminate wind reading errors. I have some insight as to elimination or reduction of ranging errors, and slope estimation errors.

I claim that the described method takes some of the SWAG out of elevation correction. I think that air density corrections can be made less of a swag, and integrated with the slope corrections. Believe it or not, bullets do obey the laws of physics - whether or not you can predict it. If you can predict something that the other guy can't it gives you an advantage, and there's no such thing as an unfair advantage!

"Hold hard guys and keep Mike honest, he may be the one that comes up with the right way to do this crap after all!"

Rick, Hold hard and keep everyone honest! Otherwise, I'm gonna feel like you guys are picking on me. ;-) I'll help build a better mousetrap, when I can, and I'll dam sure encourage others who are pushing limits in areas beyond my skill or experience.

I don't think there's any magic cure for long range accuracy. There are probably a bunch of yet to be discovered - or accepted - things that will nibble away at the limits, until the limit of accuracy has been pushed as far as possible. SWAG is always going to be there, but the more science that can work into the picture, the more accurate the average shooters are going to be. That's good, if they are on our side!

I ain't gonna run on this one. The topic may die from lack of interest - but some will become enlightened through the discussions. That's progress!

Mike (the armchair sniper)
BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
Austin, TX, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 05:40:19 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.123.14.101)

"As was pointed out it is hard to apply to MD master due to individuality of ballistics."

Whoever told you this was blowin smoke up your butt! You can get rectal cancer from hanging with people like that! Just what do you have to do when you find the MM "corrected range"? You look up the ballistics for your round and you crank them into the inches to minutes converter.

That's every bit as much "individual ballistics" as looking up the drop for the true range.

MM is adaptable to the "new" method - I'll try to stop calling it mine -with not much deviation from the present process.

Mike - the armchair sniper
BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 06:01:36 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.123.14.101)

I believe that I have sold one of my devices to Brand.

I also believe that I was the one who stated that the direct application of the cosine correction to come-ups was impractical on the Mildot Master due to its design being universal and non-caliber-specific (see my post of 09 April).

I always try to keep these exchanges of ideas gentlemanly and productive. I think that I have amply demonstrated my interest in your ideas and my willingness to examine them with an open mind.

If your recent post regarding "blowing smoke up your butt" and "rectal cancer" refers to the above-cited post, I'd appreciate it if you'd retract those statements and return to a civil discussion of these matters.

For some reason, I cannot open the document that you sent me. I spoke to Ken Hunter today and he suggested that you send it to him and he will put it into a format compatible with the Duty Roster. All readers will then be given the chance to evaluate and critique your work.

FWIW, I will try to get my findings (and opinions) on the practical aspects of this subject into the Roster tomorrow.

Sincerely,

Bruce N. Robinson <bnrobins@flash.net>
Los Lunas, NM, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 07:24:16 (ZULU) (your host address: 209.254.243.7)

It is interesting to note that the best 1,000 yard group I ever shot with a .308 I was using Berger 155 VLDs.....

Where did this 175 grain thing come from anyway?

I can testify that 168 grain bullets don't cut it.

It looks like I've got lots more to learn about shooting up and down hill.

out
Kevin R. Mussack (Andy's Dad) <kmussack@aol.com>
Clifton Springs, New York, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 08:45:54 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.12.104.29)

It is Tenabraex (SP? Danger Will Robinson, more Expresso needed!).
Not the honeycombs, sumfin else even betterer. They have been out for a while now.............
Three different critters here, the f-stoppers, the polarizers, and the ARD's. I dun kunfused yew agin. :-) This is more fun than picking on AL O.

Kevin(AndysDad),
175's were designed to stay supersonic at longer ranges and still give a velocity of over 2600 fps from M-40A-series or M-24-series rifles.
 

Chao!
 

peteR <PNGREIFF@AOL.COM>
Big City, By-Gawd, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 11:00:31 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.201.204)

Would someone be kind enough to distill the argument on slope shooting for me?

Can I measure the slant range and the angle then compensate using my Mil-Dot Master and shoot the data?

My objective is hitting the target. The science involved is interesting but the dialogs here can be a bit confusing.

Thanks,
Kevin R. Mussack (Andy's Dad) <kmussack@aol.com>
Clifton Springs, New York, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 11:51:39 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.80.33.70)

Doc King thanks for the heads-up on the Dakota drop in trigger guard and floorplate for the M700, I ordered one yesterday. It's half the price of the Badger.

Question for the gunsmiths on a heavy recoil lug for the M700, does it make any difference in a 308 ?
TonyY <ayackowski@pershing.com>
Woodbridge, NJ, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 12:37:24 (ZULU) (your host address: 32.97.88.102)

You have pricked my curiousity now about the Tenabraex. 1st, where on the web can I find more information about this product. 2nd, what is the cost of the 1" honeycomb version? 3rd, how bad is the one produced by Lupita as oppose to Tenabraex 1" version?

Lito, as you know, I have a Lupita XIII LR M3 scope. You also know that I can not put a sunshade on it. What would you recommend that is affordable but satisfatory for this model? I have the Lupita honey comb model of the Tenabraex. You are right about optic quality using the Lupita version.
 

peteR,

Where can I find more information on the f-stoppers, the polarizers, and the ARD's?
 

To All,

Just wondering if it is ok to talk about tactics on the site without inciting someone here? All the participant here are knowledgeable with the tool of the trade but what about its implementation? If not this then what about tactics? Just wondering...and please, I know if you want to learn about this then use your leather personal carrier to take you to a reputable school :)

Thanks All...

Darren...
Semper Fi and lets bring our people back from China!!!
 

Darren <ddong@usmc.net>
San Fran, CA, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 12:48:13 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.211.20.29)

So the bottom line is yes/no as in 6) and 7). If the 'old' way has worked for you in the past and you're happy and don't WANT to change then don't. If it's worked in the past yet you want to try to be better then try 'new' method. As in my earlier posting, the accuracy improvement using the 'new' method cuts the approximate solution error to half what the 'old' method gives you. Does this matter? Your choice and your decision. I do not have a MD master (sorry Bruce) so I cannot elaborate on it's utility for using the 'new' method. I'm a mech Engr so this math is very basic...to me. I also like to improve what I can so I prefer the 'new' method...and why not since I spent a fair bit of time 'deriving' it, albeit I may not have been the first guy in history to do so. Mike took som flak for trying to HELP you guys, as I did last year when it first came up...before you even tried to compare data there was some rumbling. So grab your flintlock and head to the 1000 yard line... ;-) brand.
brand <brandx375@yahoo.com>
Tx, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 13:16:06 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.193.186.188)

My intent and meaning is that the 'new' method gives better data than the 'old' method when compared to the 'actual' solution
 

brand <brandx375@yahoo.com>
Tx, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 13:23:53 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.193.186.188)

I loaded some 155s last night with 46.5 and 47grs of Varget and if we get a break in the weather I will try to get out and shoot some at 1000yds to see how they do. I also have some of the 155AMAXs but they are a lot longer and am not sure where to start with them for OAL. If I load them to touch the rifling they would never come close to fitting the mag. I may just try some at mag length and see how they do also.

The book says 2900fps is max velocity and I can see the restricting factor will be case cap. because at 47grs it is a compressed load. I talked to my shooting buddy and he says you can get 3000fps out of them with a good barrel.

Kevin..
I have not shot the 155s much but the ones I did shoot out to 600yds shot very well, I had a group at 400yds that was 1.8" for 5 shots. I have to say though that the 168s have served me well to 1000yds. I don't know how fast your pushing your 168s but at close to 2800fps they will group under MOA nearly all the time if I do my part.

Mike..
Like Bruce, I had trouble opening the e.mail you sent. I probably wouldn't understand it anyway I wasn't joking when I said I was math challenged.:):) I know what your saying and I admire you for sticking to your guns but I think it may be a lot like the spin drift theory. There are to many other outside factors that over ride your's thereby canceling it out, so to speak. As someone stated, spin drift does have a 6" drift on the bullet but when the wind has a 5 foot drift at the same range why worry about it.

I could be wrong if the effect it is having now is more than I think. But if it isn't, than the errors of wind and elevation and range estimation cancel it out, wouldn't that be correct??? If not keep hammering away and try to get it through my thick skull but you will have to do it with out all this cosin stuff, maybe draw me some pictures(HA).
Pat <mrbullet@hotmail.com>
USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 13:52:03 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.41.18.3)

For Tenabraex, ARD's, and Killflash (all the same folks)... go here:

http://www.camouflage.com/

The "Good" (very good) Killflash is actually nearly 2" thick, and very good... it's available for the MK4 Lupitas, and the big M22 Steiner bins... two versions for the MK4, one for about $40, and one for about $100 (will work with anti laser filters).

The bad one (very baaaad), for the M3-LR is sold under contract, by Lupita, and is about 1/4" thick... but the holes are real small, and that causes the optical problems... it's called "edge effect", or "Aperture Defraction" in the optical world.
The big one has very large holes in the honeycomb to avoid the "Edge effect", but then has to go to 2" thickness in order to work, and stop reflections.

I have three of the Leupold ones collecting dust.

But the good news is (so I hear???), Lupita is going to offer to change the front ring on the M3, and M1 "LR"s for a threaded one, and then you can use lens shades, and maybe the military Killflash.

Call Lupita, and ask for Garth Kendig (tell him Paul Coburn sent you ;), and ask him what the skinny is on that change.

PeteR...
I checked out the Tenabraex site, and they aren't showing any "Aperture" rings, which doesn't surprise me, as that's not in their world of interest.
Polarizers? What polarizers? they ain't got no steenkin' polarizers either! ;)

JR...
The "more bearing surface" thing has been debated for a while.
Though I can't prove it, and there are a lot of very good "Tangent" design bullets that shoot very well, if I look back over the years (not counting my black powder years in the War Between the States ;), I have to say that I have would up shooting Hornady "Secant" designs in more of my guns, after trying out all the usual suspects... so I'm a believer in the bearing thing, at least as it is done by the Hornady guys.

'lito
 

Pablito <condor@mags.net>
Is the sun ever gonna shine in this pinko state?... in the, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 14:30:11 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.60)

I must agree though that the 7mm-08 is one hell of a round but is not in the same league as the 260s at past 600yds. To make it a good long range round you need to use the 168s and then your right back up to the 308s and the 260s still out perform them. Just my thoughts, now ducking for cover!!!:):)

Tony..
Will do, It may be a while before I get the cronograph results on the loads but I will try to get them as soon as we get a break in the weather. Its been cloudy, rainy and windy for the last 3 weeks. I need some sunshine!!!!!!!!

Kevin..
Yes you can. I used to eyeball the angle than take .8 or .9 or what ever times the range, depending on the angle, and it would usually come out pretty close. With the MM you figure the angle and look it up and it will tell you the yards to dial for instead of figuring it out in your head or on a calculator. Faster and more convenient with all the data you need in one little unit.

Pat <mrbullet@hotmail.com>
USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 14:43:08 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.41.18.3)

All: If this is a better approximation, it would be foolish to dismiss it as more useless book larnin', cuz book larnin' ain't never scalded no hawgs.
 
 
 
 
 

CDC' <criscurt@isu.edu>
USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 15:11:10 (ZULU) (your host address: 134.50.253.13)

If the LApua 139 6.5mm Scenars are truely .612 BC then they deserve a try in my 6.5-06. Any one else try these?
TonyY <ayackowski@pershing.com>
Woodbridge, NJ, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 15:41:52 (ZULU) (your host address: 32.97.88.102)

Guys... don't get too carried away with comparing Lapua, Berger, Sierra, etc by published BC numbers.
The BCs are NOT established by a standard proceedure, so Sierra's .560 may not be compreable to someone else's .560.
Some, like Sierra test their bullets, and run their own program. Some other companies use cross-section profiles, and estimate the BCs, or run tests, but don't use a standard program... your best bet, is to load them at the same velocity, and shoot them against each other.

'lito
 

Pablito <condor@mags.net>
USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 16:02:26 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.60)

Then you state that its 34MOA a long way from 31 MOA that it should be and would be about 32" low or a near miss.

In my way of doing it I take the cosine of .9 times the "YARDAGE" NOT the drop in inches at that yardage. Then I come up with 900yards and I look at my data and it tells me to dial in 31.2 MOA for my shot on a 25.8 degree slope at 1000yds. That is just what you say I am suppose to come up with. Now where am I wrong or don't I understand what your saying??? If so please give me some more examples of yours with diffent ranges and the MOA you would come up with to shoot at that range. Thank you!!!!
Pat <mrbullet@hotmail.com>
USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 16:27:44 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.41.18.3)

According to the method I'm advocating, and advocated by BrandX before me, the corrected drop for this shot is 355.5 inches, calculated as you describe. That's 34 MOA, more or less.

The conventional method, as implemented on Mil-Dot Master, takes the .9 times the range, enters the ballistic tables at that range, and looks up (or interpolates) the 900 yard drop (about 294 inches; I don't have that table in front of me as I write this), which comes out to something in the area of 31.2 MOA (294/(1.047 * 9 hundred)) worth of drop.

" Then you state that its 34MOA a long way from 31 MOA that it should be and would be about 32" low or a near miss."

This part is backwards. I didn't mean to imply that 31 MOA was the correct elevation. It should be 34 MOA and you are only going to put 31 MOA on your rifle according to the MM method. My sentence structure there needs some improving. Maybe in lots of other places, too!

Mike
BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
Austin, TX, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 17:01:20 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.18.199.140)

I didn't shoot any 168s but I did shoot 175 in comparisons. When I had the dope for the 155 Lapuas I loaded in several 175s and shot misses at low and out the wind side. This was at over 600 and also over 700 yards.

Again, I'm convinced the real world BCs for these 155 bullets is correct as compared to the real world BC listed for Sierra 175s. The 175s track as predicted by the trajectory software I use and the 155 Lapua bullets also tracked as predicted by this same software. If there were a problem they shouldn't both track as predicted.

Run 2650 fps, BC .496, weight 175 against 2900 fps, BC .508 weight 155.
 
 
 
 
 

Dave "Doc" King <David_L_King@Yahoo.Com>
Damascus, MD, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 17:05:58 (ZULU) (your host address: 131.158.166.157)

Shooting down at 30 degrees. (450 yards above target)
Measured range to target is 900 yards. (hypotenuse)
(Cos30)(900)= 779 yards.(base leg)
Dial in elevation data for 780 yard.
Dial in windage data for 900 yards??

yes?
Kevin R. Mussack (Andy's Dad) <kmussack@aol.com>
Clifton Springs, New York, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 17:26:54 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.80.33.70)

Bruce, I regret the crude remark that I made that you rightly took offense to. Will do my best to avoid such in the future.

I'll explain my position in less-crude terms. The issue was the remark that the corrections were ballistics-dependent. BrandX wrote "As was pointed out it is hard to apply to MD master due to individuality of ballistics." To which I made the vulgar reply.

Conventionally, the corrected range, calculated by MM, is used to enter the individual ballistics table for the round/rifle being fired, and a drop determined for that corrected range. That, sir, is as individual as anything that is needed in the other method. The difference is the application of the drop data.

What I'm proposing is that the drop lookup happen for the true range, determined by target size and MOA size, as indicated by the index on the range scale. That range is used to find the drop. That drop is entered (as a range) under the range index. The corrected drop is now read off of the appropriate angle index. True range is put back under the index, and corrected drop used to enter the inches to MOA converter window. It sounds cumbersome - but from lots of years of sliderule use, I can tell you that with a little practice it will run almost as fast as the conventional method.

Mike
BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
Austin, TX, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 17:29:58 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.18.199.140)

I use a 24" and get 2735 with Berger 168's, haven't tried the 175's yet, still have about 1200 rds of 168 left.

Berger states a .520 BC with their 168 VLD's so I used this in my computer along with my 2735 fps chrono'd average for 100+ 5 shot groups.

Using your 2900 fps and .508 BC with a G7 Drag coefficient I made a comparison to the 168's and found the 155's should have 32" less drop at 1000 yds and 3 MOA less wind deflection in a 15mph full wind at 1000. Using the .496 and 2650 for 175's it indicated about 53" less drop and 5.5 MOA less wind deflection in the same conditions. Were your results similar? Just curious...

PS: No slope calc's were made.
 

TonyY <ayackowski@pershing.com>
Woodbridge, NJ, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 18:19:10 (ZULU) (your host address: 32.97.88.102)

Can you guys get together and post the paper, as it is, so everyone can see it? Several of the (shooting) engineers here would like to see it. I understand the idea, and would like to follow the discussion in more detail. Besides, I'd like to check some numbers (we've got more 'puter horsepower than NASA);-)
 

Duman <steve_duey@hp.com>
Denver, CO, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 18:41:07 (ZULU) (your host address: 15.254.49.2)

Yes, thats the old way.

What these guys are saying is to multiply your (cos 30)(comups for900)
instead of the yardage.

It sound like it may be a better approximation.
iiii's <mikelsam@cox-internet.com>
Siloam Springs, Ar, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 19:06:31 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.180.111.53)

What I find interesting is that in the 3 years that I have used the MM and before that, I figured with a calculator, I would usually hit what I was aiming at or damn close and if I missed it was usually wind that got me. Granted I am not shooting big angles here either because out here in the plains we don't have a lot of high hills to shoot off of.

Where I used it most was in Wyoming shooting across canyons down into draws. I found that in the same shooting position I would engage 4 targets from say 550 to 980 yards and depending on where the target was I could have maybe a 30 degree down hill shot at the 550 yard target and then have around a 15 degree or less shot for one further out.

I think you can see what I am getting at. I don't really know what the exact angle is and I can be off and easy 10 degrees maybe more. I think what has happened with me an others on here is that through the years of shooting we have come to learn where to hold or what to use and damn if we don't get pretty damn close a lot of times.

I know your trying to say that what you have is better or more accurate but in the REAL WORLD that we shoot in we probably don't have the EXACT angle or humidity or elevation and there for our calculations would be flawed anyway.

What the MM gives us is a ball park to play in and the rest as, Rick says, is just experience and SWAG based on that experience. If I was always shooting low on my angle targets I would jump on your band wagon but I have shot over them as much as under if I miss so I don't know what the answer is other than PRACTICE, PRACTICE,PRACTICE. Just my thoughts on this and now I will jump off my soap box.
Pat <mrbullet@hotmail.com>
USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 19:58:37 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.41.18.3)

Thanks. We all get a bit testy at times. You responded as a gentleman and I appreciate it. End.

NOW!!

I finally got up with Lou and we went over your basic premise. He told me that this was the method he used in his angle calculations for his Ballisticards, based on hours of conversations with Sierra ballisticians and a prof at MIT. This was after he groaned and cursed a bit, since angle correction has been a thorn in his side for years. PLEASE, don't anybody here contact him with any more angle questions! He feels that this issue can be put to bed right now, and I agree.

There are tactical advantages to the "Quick Fix" method (more later), but the method that Lou and Sierra use, and that you are advocating here, is undeniably more accurate.

I would make one suggestion about your last post. Makes it less "cumbersome."

Let's take a steep angle example, a 500 yard shot at 45 degrees. Using Black Hills data for their 175 gr. .308 with a 100 yd. zero, we have a come-up of 11.7 MOA (61.25"). Multiplying by .707 (cos 45) gives us a drop of 43.3", our corrected drop for that angle. At 500 yds., that translates to 8.3 MOA, our new come-up for 45 degrees.

EASIER:

11.7 MOA times cos 45 equals 8.3 MOA.

I think (and Lou agrees) that you can simply take the come-up for a range, use the Range scale, (11.7 MOA = 1170 yds., set to "Target Range" index), and read corrected come-up at the angle (830 yds. = 8.3 MOA), without bouncing back and forth. This simple method is what I proposed on 09 April, but I guess I didn't make it clear.

You should have come-ups on the back of your Mildot Master, anyway, not inches of drop.

Please try your examples with this method on the Mildot Master on my website (click on my name) and let me know if this is consistent with your findings.

I would point out two things again:

This method is easily used with the Mildot Master.

The two methods described in the manual are "quick fix" methods designated for use at shorter ranges (500 or less) and shallow agles (15 degrees or less). The reason that the Quick fix is so widely used is because of the prevalence of BDC-equipped scopes, and the manual points out that you can range, then look at the corrected range without moving the slide, and turn the BDC to the corrected range and be done with it. (I know, Pablito, they're dials, not BDC's). The "quick fix" method is acceptably accurate within the limits described above.

I will gladly include additional information that addresses the come-up correction method in future revisions of the manual, for those users considering long-range, steeper angle shooting. While I doubt that many of you are going to to encounter any 30 degree 1000 yard shots, it couldn't hurt.

Brand,

Those are the scales I used. I just think the Mildot Master is quicker. Please try it out at the website and see if you don't agree.

To All:

I'm done with this (unless someone wants to continue off-line). It's been a pleasure, we've all learned something, and all who participated have my thanks. Within a month, I hope that we can direct any slope correction questions "To The Archives!"

Best Regards,
 
 
 

Bruce N. Robinson <bnrobins@flash.net>
Los Lunas, NM, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 20:14:34 (ZULU) (your host address: 209.254.243.22)

Tall tales?

Man I'm crushed.
Mike in Texas <mcdonald@hcn.hcnews.com>
Granbury, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 20:39:27 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.232.237.136)

Narrowed the choices to Leupold VariX II 3-9 and the 6X42mm, both tactical scopes. Is the MilDot really that useful over 500 yards for range estimation? Have used the crosshair opening for years with reasonable results. Pros & cons of anti relection device over lens shade. Is it a real issue? Really like the variable for wider field of view when necessary and higher magnification for intelligence/target ID.
WR Moore <wrmoore2001@yahoo.com>
VA, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 21:15:36 (ZULU) (your host address: 158.106.50.3)

Onward and upward to new heights of shooting wisdom!
 

Remember the NC state championship 1000 yard match at Hawk's Ridge is the weekend of April 21.

http://www.nc1000ydshooters.com/
 

For a philosophical question, is there any practical, non-hunting, tactical use for a 7 mag or 300 mag Sendero? Think on that one as I have some selling/trading issues at hand. I still have the chones for the 6.5x284 and there are no elk or elephants in NC to hunt.
 

If a 175 grain, 30 cal boolit is the match boolit of choice for the 308, why is it not also the choice for a 300 mag?
 

Any need to carry binos on the stalk comp at Storm? Trying to pair down the weight.
 

Anyone have a snake proof face mask for the stalk?
 

A whooped Bolt, out!
 
 

Bolt <reeldoctor@mindspring.com>
NC, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 22:00:01 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.50.55.125)

Jim Wise
Jim Wise <jim5656@hotmail.com>
frostproof, Fl, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 23:22:02 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.25.115.120)

I like the Mil-Dot Master. A lot. If you don't have one, carry your slope cards. Or memorize your angle compensation factors (.7, .8, .9, etc.).

I kind of agree with you, Mike, in that you should be able to take all variables out of the "One shot - one kill" philosophy. But rifles, ammo, and human beings being what they are in April 2001, you can't get everything into a small package (yet).

If you had the space and the vehicle to get it around full-time in, the package would be awesome. How big is it going to be, and how much are you as a hobbyist willing to pay for it (in both sweat and dollars)? Prime example: the 120mm rifle on the M1A2 tank can fire sabots (depleted uranium "darts"), High explosive anti-tank (HEAT) shells, and a few other different types of ammo at a moving target (while your own tank is moving) and expect a FIRST ROUND HIT, IN THE DARK, while hauling in excess of 75 miles per hour over rough terrain. Your first movement is to select your ammo type. Your computer then corrects for movement on three axes, barrel droop, rifling wear, wind, temperature, humidity, drift, etc., etc.

Would that be great on a rifle? You bet. Hasn't been built yet, though. Think of it: select from 155, 168, 175, 190, etc. HPBT/tracer/AP/APIT. Squeeze trigger. Hit.

Visit the Lilja home page in the Hot Links section, and you'll read of big game kills at 600, 700, 1,000, and 1100 yards.

Precision Shooting's book, "Precision Shooting at 1,000 Yards" has some awesome long-range articles from fellas who have gone beyond the slide rule stage and shot at range. On 31 May, 2000, Kreg Slack fired three 300 grain Sierra Match Kings from a .338 Lapua Magnum to kill a prairie dog at 3,125 (witnessed) yards. His previous record was 2,632 yards with a .308 Ackley Improved (308 Win with adjusted shoulder) in a Winchester Model 70. Bullet drop approaches 900 feet at 3,000 yards.

Load it and shoot, then argue math. Or give Bruce Robinson a check.

Sinister Dave <mliwanag@nc.rr.com>
USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 23:37:54 (ZULU) (your host address: 66.26.22.240)

The M70 trigger is easy. Pull the action out of the stock, and you will see a threaded screw through the trigger. There are three small 1/4" nuts on the screw.
The one against the trigger... that's the over travel screw. Adjust that one first.
The other two nuts are locked against each other, and hold the spring tension. Loosen these two, and spin the nuts towards the trigger to lighten the pull. When it is as you like it, tighten them together.
That's it... the engagement is cut in at the factory, and is set with a guage... it's good and clean out of the box.
IF you can't get the pull down to where you want, then there are too many coils on the spring. Push the trigger pin PART WAY OUT, until the trigger comes out, but the bolt release, and bolt release spring stays in.

Cut two coils off the spring, and re-asemble... readjust the pull, and do all the tests that you did for the Remington... and go shoot it!

Bolt-ster...
The 190 and heavier bullets are standard on the 300WM, because it's considered a longer range round, and the heavier bullets will perform better, out past 500 or 600 yds.
For "Long" range shooting, it's best to use the heaviest bullet that give the best performance (energy, and/or trajectory) at the range you are HITTING at, not the best velocity at the muzzle.

'lito
 

Pablito <condor@mags.net>
I saw a birdie today... it's spring, in the North East, USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 23:51:07 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.11)

You're crushed??...HAH!!!!!!

I will be, when I see the pudding!!!!(((:

Matter of fact, I been meaning to check on your achievements.

Oh great one of the long ranges.........

Two Shoes
Never the teacher, always the student
At Mike in Texas' feet!!!!!
Terry <tls8323@cs.com>
USA - Tuesday, April 10, 2001 at 23:59:21 (ZULU) (your host address: 205.188.195.36)

Well I had a bad day until UPS met me at the door with my new GNA Precision built Rifle. Dont know what to call it yet. George has made a Remington 700 based 338 Lapua and it looks like a million bucks. Can not wait for the shooting next week. Any help with the name? He can market these now and make a Lapua we all can afford. Very nice job George.

Now Jerry is building me a new 338 Ultra with a new recoil device that should catch some eyes. Kxp bbl, M40A1 stock, new device and no muzzle brake. Now this should be something interesting. The recoil device replaces the 3 way adjustable butt plate. I am looking for something I can carry, kill Elk and shoot at very long ranges with.

Looks like I am going to Pendelton next month for two weeks or so. Great bunch of guys and I can not wait to get down there and bust some caps with the USMC.

I came up with a new sling yesterday and you guys are the first to hear of it. It is a Tuff Cuff for a M4/MP5/FAL with a quick disconnect for that "Oh S... I need to dump this rifle thing". Hope to have something on the site soon. Pete you want one to test?

Many things on the fire. Have to run.

Undude
MikeMIller <tactical@tacticalintervention.com>
Calif, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 00:25:17 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.201.184)

I've been working hard to come up with a few rifle projects for this summer, I'm getting bored making barrels for everyone but me :)

Here's what I've got so far,

1)H-S .308 Win HTR

action: H-S Precision Stainless steel Short Action

bbl: 26" length, 1/10" twist, 6 groove, fluted, possibly teflon finish but I'll probably end up camo'ing the whole rifle

stock: PST 25(SA tac), with forend rail, SS 4 round Detachable Mag

peeps: I'm looking at least at the Mark4 M1-10x40 3/4mildot, but I need to see what my sis can get thru Cabela's(works there) cuz I like the US Optics. Plus I have a buddy in Norway who I'd like to speak to about a few German scopes.

strap: The Tactical Intervention sling built by good buddy Mike Miller of course!!

2)JR 6.5 x 284, built by JR(me) and JR(Jerry Rice):

I want to tear the pipe off my 300 Win Mag HTR (trued and lapped Remington receiver, H-S 05F stock and barrel, which I built both) and rebarrel it to 6.5X284. I'd like to send a 30" barrel blank (unturned) to either Jerry or George Gardner, and have them work their magic. I think that the contouring, chamber and crown, and fitting should be done in the same shop. MikeM, Norcal turns barrels, don't they??

All in all, it should be a good year if I can get these projects to come to light this summer :) Car(s) will be paid off, and I'm lucky enough to be single, so what the hell else am I going to spend money on!!! heheh
 

mrbullet:

Like I said, I haven't 'seen' the 260Rem work downrange, but at 100 yds, it's not convincing me that it is superior enough to the 7-08 or .308 to justify building one for myself. You have a lot more experience with the round than I do, so I digress. If I can get the 6.5 x 284 built before D&L, I'll send it with ya regardless if I can make it down there or not.

later guys
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

JR <jr_rcsd@hotmail.com>
rapid city, sd, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 01:40:43 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.34.14.24)

All the math is going way over my head...flunked math!!! Never had a good use for most of it (until recently!!). FWIW (about 2 cents AFTER taxes) I would rather be shooting to see where the bullets go than trying to figure it out on a slide rule. Then again, no one's life hangs in the balance on my shooting.

I am pretty excited..picked up a pistola for the wife...she shot it...she hit with it...she LIKED IT....and now she's ASKING FOR MORE TARGETS!!!!. I told her "quit looking at me like that" LOL.
An old Webley MkVI..can you believe it!!!
To keep it on topic...precision shooting ya know...I shot the first group with it and it shoots one hole at 15 yards easy with 200 grn hardcast SWC. She put 6 shots into the 9 and 8 ring from 15 yards...first time with a pistol. Kewl!
I get to put my new .45ACP loading stuff to even better use...and she can't claim I am a wierdo for loading ammo anymore LOL!

Need some info, please email me account off topic...
Does anyone know about what chamber pressure I can go to with .45ACP in one of these? I am searching around for stuff on loads but haven't found much other than a bunch of Lawrence of Arabia stories.....loaded some 185grn XTP HP's over 5.9 grains 231 in Nickel cases for now.

Article on the Savage stock fix would be much more effective with some pics. Working on borrowing the digital camera thingy.

Mike..new sling sounds cool. I currently use the...."boonie packer" I think it is called....on my CAR15 lightweight. I like it, however I do have an issue or two with it. Your new sling will be more useful?
 

....still waiting for the ground to dry so I can play with the tractor and fix up my backstop...but it just keeps on raining!!!
Geoff M <kill@internetwis.com>
USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 02:02:02 (ZULU) (your host address: 209.207.52.60)

I appreciate the feedback and interaction that I've had with all of you. I've learned a couple of things, and I think it works both ways. Even if it gets a bit rough in the middle!

Lets lay this one aside for a while. I'm still open to off-board email, though.

On that automatic hole punch called the M1A Abrams - I wonder how they dope the wind in that machine? Or maybe the MV and BC are so high that it doesn't matter? I know MV is over 5000 FPS. That's moving! Bet the BC is way over 1, too. They aren't afraid to shine a laser to get a range, either. Probably 10 watts worth or so, about 10 milliseconds before they fire. If the round misses, the laser pulse will blind the opposition!

How to get that kind of ballistics from a shoulder-fired wep? Maybe about a 2 mm dart about 4" long? Talk about a long action bolt!

Regards

Mike - the armchair sniper

BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
Austin, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 02:09:34 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.217.73.251)

Yer not just trying to butter me up so I'll tell you to let your ugly sister know where to bring the cookies, are ya!! ;)

I agree with ya, a lot of the BC's the bullet companies are advertising are not precise, and one company's BC inveritably differs from the next. They need to compute according to the same standard, and they don't. Plus, a solid bullet's BC may match a lead-core bullet's, but will fly differently.

out
 

JR <jr_rcsd@hotmail.com>
rapid city, sd, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 02:09:39 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.34.14.24)

We just turned up the Texas Brigade Armory website. Very minor tweek or two with a picture.. but the good stuff is there and easy to follow.

http://www.texasbrigadearmory.com

Ken :)

Ken Hunter <hunterkr@riflemen.net>
Nokesville, Va, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 02:16:27 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.233.164.10)

He finely went and got himself a REAL RIFFLE... a Winchester M70 heavy Target, made in the 60's with a pig fat tube, and a beautiful stock, in .308... like the one that Sinister got last fall, and like the one I got last year... no more .308 towed.. now he's got a real gun ;))

Congratulations Ken...

'lito
 

Pablito <condor@mags.net>
I saw a birdie today... it's spring, in the North East, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 03:03:05 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.116)

whew!

Okay... 2 items for your viewing....

1. Pablito has written a piece for both introductions for newbies, and older hogs that need a refresher...
Check it out at: http://www.snipercountry.com/Intro/intro.htm

Should be easy to load ... not too fancy on formatting..

2. Also... BMG's slope shooting paper... now... if you have the adobe reader plugin on your browser... then do this:

http://www.snipercountry.com/SlopeShooting/shoot_on_slope_draft.pdf

I tried to read that .pdf file into ms word and ms front page... no workie... most of the hogs should be able to pull this down and read or print it.

If not - then go to the adobe website and download the adobe reader for free...

Pablito: Yea....thing is ... that Winch. M70 is crying out quite loudly for one of those long unertl's

Hold Hard Hogs... Ima hittin' the sack...

Ken :)

Ken Hunter <hunterkr@riflemen.net>
Nokesville, Va, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 03:28:42 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.233.164.10)

First on gear: I know you guys have said that an e-tool is useful, seems I remember Kent recomending a Glock. I quit carrying one the day I didn't have to anymore. The tri-fold POS, is, in my mind, exactly that. They don't hold up for ANYTHING with a modicum of abuse or hard use. Are the heavier ones worth carrying? Would the Glock model be a waste of weight and space? I'm thinking of having that harness "pack mod" put on my pack if it's worth while, just to have it all done at the same time. Comments?

Second off, also on gear: Gonna have some mag pouches made up, but there's two things I need to figure out before I have it all done. First off is what kind of buckles to use. I've got the ones like are on a standard '16 mag pouch, and I've got some that are like small A3 belt buckles. I notice that Blackhawk uses the latter on some of their stuff, and I know that I've broken the little "prong" part of a standard '16 mag pouch buckle. Anyone have any good suggestions? The reason for the custom mag pouches is so that I can have my '14 mags WITH the magpuls (thanks Mike! You're the cause of this addiction) AND turn one of the mag dividers into a very thin pouch for the mildot master, so I can have it EVERYTIME I don my gear. And I also need some of that plastic fabric stiffener stuff like in the '16 pouches to do it right. Any good suggestions on where I can get some?

Last question, also on gear ;-) Hey UnDude: if that new one is good for a FAL, I'm assuming it'd be good for a '14? I'd be REALLY interested in something that would work for the '14, and if it ALSO works on the CAR, then more power going! You gonna do me up one in 1.25" OD? *PLEASE*? I know 1.25" is a touch wide on a CAR, but it's just right for a '14.
Bravo - Patriots USA <Bravo762@yahoo.com>
Still snowing in Arlen, Texas, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 04:10:05 (ZULU) (your host address: 209.180.85.173)

All: This extreme difference in elevation problem may very well be useful for those of us who hunt in the mountains. These incremental improvements are important. Error accumulates.
 

CDC' <criscurt@isu.edu>
USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 04:36:26 (ZULU) (your host address: 134.50.253.13)

you....you mean in ..... THIN AIR ???

t

torsten <7.62@lasercon.de>
germany - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 07:16:41 (ZULU) (your host address: 62.224.19.163)

The Glock E-tool is about as good as they get. It is still fragile and cannot be expected to hold up to much abuse. I didn't go with the "Spetsnaz" tool because although it is tough it doesn't have the L-fold scoop mode. To dig a spider hole you need to be able to scoop. Don't overlook the E-tool as a weapon. In my opinion a properly sharpened E-tool is a 21st Century battle axe and can be used to some effect in that role. It's tempting to leave the E-tool behind because it is heavy however when you need it you really NEED it. The handle of the Gock is non-conductive and this can be a plus. Another nice feature of the Glock E-tool is that is has a wood saw in the handle which allows you to quietly gather necessary materials. I also pack a bastard file to keep one edge sharp for light chopping chores. I keep some 550 cord wrapped around the handle to use for lashing.

Mag-Pulls are neat but I can't get my standard magazine pouches to close over them. I'm still looking for a pouch that will fit. Any suggestions?

Years ago I used to use a strobe in my work and had a nice little blue lens to go over it. This kept the Cobra guys from getting nervous. Where can I get one of these lenses? Are they still used?

Are there small laser detectors/alarms available? This seems like a useful device in todays environment.

Another great day here.
No snow...
Kevin R. Mussack (Andy's Dad) <kmussack@aol.com>
Clifton Springs, New York, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 11:57:50 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.80.33.70)

Flatlanders think so. The hard part is doping the swirling wind.

CDC' <criscurt@isu.edu>
USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 12:19:57 (ZULU) (your host address: 134.50.253.13)

Simple question, hide development and placementfor a military sniper:

Ok, you move into your AO, now you need to find a place to rest your behind and do your job. The location can either be in a natural or urban environment.

1st, how would you select your hide?
2nd, when do you determine your E&E route?
3rd, do you have one or two E&E route setup?
4th, do you determine your location indicator before you get into your hide?
5th, the hide, for urban, I figure timing is not as big of an issue as say in a natural environment. In a natural environment, when is it best to move to your FFP and create your hide?
6th, what is involved in creating a hide?
7th, what are the general no no's when creating a hide?

I figure that we all do long range shooting and the majority of us here are competent at shooting beyond 500 yards. But what about once we get to a location to shoot, what is involved to creating an ideal situation to shoot from.

Thanks all, and to those who will respond by E-Mail.

Darren...
Semper Fi
Darren <ddong@usmc.net>
San Francisco, CA, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 12:41:51 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.211.20.29)

Thanks for the quick answer on the Mod 70 trigger. I read your intro that Ken Hunter put up, I think it's just right. Straightforward, no BS, informative. If you're ever gonna be in Fla, e-mail and I'll buy you a brew.
Thanks again,
Jim Wise
Jim Wise <jim5656@hotmail.com>
Frostproof, Fl, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 13:34:40 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.36.28.52)

Need a tuneup before the Snipers Paradise thingie, or a trip to Storm?

TacPRo Shooting Center has a precision rifle course going on April 20-22 of this year that has just had several last minute cancellations; slots are available.

The course covers the basics of precision rifle shooting from 100 to 1000 yards, instructed by Bill Davison, formerly British SBS, and a local Tactical team rifleman from the DFW area. This gentleman is a former Marine Corps shooting team member, knows his stuff. Bill ain't no slouch either.

Course of fire will require a minimum of 300 rounds of ammunition.

The range is located 90 minutes west of DFW airport, and accomodations are available in Stephenville, 18 miles south.

If it sounds interesting give them a call at 254-968-3112 or hit me off line.

Thanks for the bandwidth.

Mike

Mike in Texas <appspec1@aol.com>
Texas, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 14:22:40 (ZULU) (your host address: 172.148.223.207)

Mike and Bruce..
How much actual difference would we be talking in the real world if when I gusess the angle I am off by 5 to 10 degrees on my guess??

I know that I have shot both over and under a target at long range and I am sure thats probably part of the problem. This is why I have a hard time with Mikes more complicated method. Like I said, I don't get a lot of angle shooting because of where I live but I do have places where I do some of it. The angles are usually never past 30 degrees though at the longer ranges.

If I am shooting at a larger target it usually isn't much of a problem but when it comes into play is when you have to shoot at a much smaller target at longer ranges.

I am sure that on paper your correct Mike but I am still wondering if it will be that noticalbe in the field. I guess it still makes me think of the spin drift argument, it does make a difference but is it enough of one???

In closing I would like to thank both of you guys for trying to make things better and easier for us trigger pullers, my hats off to you both and to the rest of you guys out there who do the same!!!!!!!
Pat <mrbullet@hotmail.com>
USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 14:23:20 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.41.14.11)

Let's say there are 20 factors that affect the shot and that you are almost certain of the behavior of all 20 factors. Let's also say that each will work the way you want with the probability of .99. That means that you have a probality of .99^20 = .82 of making the shot. That's not great.

Now let's say that each will happen with the probability of .98. That's .98^20 = .67. The difference between .98 and .99 looks small, but the error accumulates.

If you swap those .98s for .95s you are down to a probability of .36 of making your hit.

Individual differences are small, but the differences add up. Any time I get a freebie way of reducing error, I do it.

CDC' <criscurt@isu.edu>
USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 15:11:57 (ZULU) (your host address: 134.50.253.13)

Your questions:

1st, how would you select your hide? I would select it based on all available intel. (ie cover and concealment both on the ground and from the air, avenues of approach, time on target, E&E routes, distance to extraction point, alternates, etc.)

2nd, when do you determine your E&E route? When planning for the mission. The more you plan the more likely it will work and there will be fewer suprises.

3rd, do you have one or two E&E route setup? There are always primary and secondary objectives and route selections. Whether in a direct action or just intel gathering mission. This includes movement both in and out. E&E routes can be routes or networks already pre-established depending on how deep your infiltrating or how long operations have been conducted in the area of operation. May even involve contact with the local indigenous for their assistance.

4th, do you determine your location indicator before you get into your hide? I'm not sure what you mean by location indicator. (The objective or movement into an FFP ? Or knowing where you are and where you have to be and when?)

5th, the hide, for urban, I figure timing is not as big of an issue as say in a natural environment. In a natural environment, when is it best to move to your FFP and create your hide? Best movement is in low light and bad weather. Sometimes!! Object is to avoid detection. This depends alot on the enemies capabilitites. (eyes, ears, and reaction times) Always assume the enemy is watching and listening.

6th, what is involved in creating a hide? Is it a hasty target of opportunity or a long term supporting role position? Plain natural concealment and cover might be best assuming you stalk, take the shot and leave. I guess the bottom line is how long you plan to stay and how much time you have to do it in. Deception and what it takes comes to mind.

7th, what are the general no no's when creating a hide? Keep it natural, blend in, cover your movements, sounds, etc. Out of sight out of mind seems to fit the idea here.
 

Hope others join in. Active and former military. Would like to hear from LE on whether there is a plan in place or do you just go by available intel and rely on training to sieze the situation at hand?
 

De Oppresso Liber. We penetrate deeper. We stay longer. We carry a heavier load.

TonyY <ayackowski@pershing.com>
Woodbridge, NJ, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 15:42:32 (ZULU) (your host address: 32.97.88.102)

Here's my analysis. OK, maybe analysis is too strong a word! I haven't beat this out in mathematical detail. A quick look says that the cosine-drop method ought to have less than a 1% inherent error, and that only at steep angles, for shots with 1-2 second TOF. The error will get worse with long Time Of Flight.

The cosine-range method can have rather larger inherent errors, around 10% in the example in my paper. Error being a function of both range and slope. Angular estimation errors add to the inherent error in both methods.

Using cosine-drop, to get a 10% error due to slope mis-estimation would require you mis-estimate a 25 degree slope as 0, or as 36, degrees. That ought to be hard to do. Steeper slopes will be more sensitive to angle errors, in both methods.

Cosine-range is more sensitive to angular errors than cosine-drop, since angle errors cause you to go to different places in the drop table. The drops that you find are related to t squared.

I suggest that you try the cosine-range method with an assumed range and several slightly different angles to see what the error sensitivity might be with your load data. Compare it with the JBM ballistics program for the same range and angles. (JBM comes up with the same corrected angle that cosine-drop does.)

You have an angle estimator at the end of your arm, even if you lose your Mil-Dot Master. My fist covers about 9 degrees with my arm extended. Your fist may be different. I can stack fists to estimate bigger angles, and I think I can come within 5 degrees (half-fist) on not-too-steep slopes.

HTH - Mike

BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
Austin, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 16:21:17 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.18.199.151)

Don't want to gore anyone's ox here, but the spin drift error is a constant - not random, for a particular range. If you could dope the wind 100% correctly, that constant would show up.

To my way of thinking, random errors are the unpredictable results of factors of which you have incomplete knowledge or control. Systematic departures from your point of aim can be compensated for, if you know of them. They contribute a shift in the center of the random dispersion due to the other factors.

Mike's view from the armchair
BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
Austin, Republic of Texas - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 16:33:10 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.18.199.151)

Like Tony it's been a long time since I worked in the field but here are a few of my thoughts....

Security, security, security....see the enemy first. There are a number of historical fights gone bad because the element of surprise was lost or simple security measures were not taken. This goes for the SWAT guys too. I have watched TV coverage of SWAT deployments with the long riflemen deploying like they were on the way to the range. One of these days a hard lesson will be learned because the BGs will have planned ahead or come prepared to deal with the police snipers. Always provide for security and have a "what if" plan. Just because you are part of an inward looking perimeter don't assume that a threat can't come from your six o'clock.

Remember the objective is to hit your target and SURVIVE. Your route of egress is critical. This route needs to be covered and concealed. When the time comes to leave do so. Don't hang around.

I'm not sure I'd build any type of hide or dugout forward of the FEBA. It seems to me you'd want to leave no evidence of your activities other than enemy casualties. This might not be the school solution. Rick would know better than me.

I have not thought in these terms in a long time.
I guess I'll have a Moon Pie and a RC to reminisce.

out
Kevin R. Mussack (Andy's Dad) <kmussack@aol.com>
Clifton Springs, New York, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 17:23:03 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.80.33.70)

HDR <hprudisell@aol.com>
Bartlesville, OK, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 17:35:27 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.197.207)

Now you're talking my country! Houah! Unfortunately, RC cola is hard to get (virtually impossible) here, like McEwans Export, and finding moon pies, especially banana, is troublesome at best. It's rough living on the frontier sometimes LOL

A son of the Confederacy
 

Boomhauer <Bravo762@yahoo.com>
Still snowy in Arlen, Texas, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 17:54:57 (ZULU) (your host address: 12.9.223.237)

Darren...
Semper Fi
Darren <ddong@usmc.net>
San Francisco, CA, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 18:04:01 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.211.20.29)

Pablito,
Excellent intro letter.... Kudos....
 

********
Guys, got an email asking if I knew someone, and I don't, but I'd thought I'd try to help the fella and see if any of you know... The emailer was looking for "Hook", a former sniper, WWII/Korea/Vietnam vet, who does some riflebuilding, located "in the South".... didn't ring ANY bells at all for me (the "Hook" I know wasn't in the military and doesn't deal w/rifles, and the military guys I know, none go by "Hook"). If anyone might know who this is, or have contact info, forward it to me, and I'll send it along to this fella. Thanks...
*********
 

McEwan's, eh? One of the better ones... recently taken after Negro Modelo, still fond of Killian's and Rolling Rock, but if you're buyin' whatever I'm drinkin' whatever! ;-)

L8R,

-L
 

Leslie <lnbright@naxs.net>
TN-VA, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 20:20:40 (ZULU) (your host address: 165.176.6.34)

I am not LE or Military but between here and the other umpteen thousand sites that I have been to, here is my 1 1/2 cents worth.

"Ok, you move into your AO, now you need to find a place to rest your behind and do your job. The location can either be in a natural or urban environment."

First, you need to know as much as you can before you enter your AO. As Sinister pointed out, there are many forms of recon involved including ground and overhead photos, topo maps, captives, etc. This type of intell will reduce your pucker factor before you get on the bus.

"1st, how would you select your hide?"

Unless you are in a true military environment, remember most civies don't know what to look for or where to look exept for what they have seen in the movies. Roofs, bushes, windows, etc. You can therefore start eliminating the obivious. Start thinking of being behind fences of all types, unfinished buildings, rubble piles, etc. In a mil eviron, you need to be thinking like a spotter. What would you be looking for if you were looking for you?

In my opinion your hide should be choosen based on the following:
From a position far enough away from the BG as you can get and still be able to make a clean shot.
From a position that you can skooter poot quickly and quietly with cover and concealment in the opposite direction.
From a postion that protects your 6 and flanks.

"2nd, when do you determine your E&E route?"

Before the trip using intell or during the trip in.

"3rd, do you have one or two E&E route setup?"

At least two, one main and one that you can double back on.

"4th, do you determine your location indicator before you get into your hide?"

Lost me on this one.

"5th, the hide, for urban, I figure timing is not as big of an issue as say in a natural environment. In a natural environment, when is it best to move to your FFP and create your hide?"

Timing is the main issue in creating any hide, urban or natural. You have to use the ambient natural environment to cover your movement and noise. You want to create it when you think the BG is not at his peak give-a-shit level. In the urban, it may be during the middle of the day when everyone is moving everywhere and not paying attention to anything particular. You could go in as a normal run of the mil civy and set up. In the natural, it may be the middle of the day when the BG is sleepy from the nights gaurd duty, maybe at night, maybe when the wind is blowing hard, when it is raining, etc.

"6th, what is involved in creating a hide?"

Buy the tape called "The Art of Camoflauge".

"7th, what are the general no no's when creating a hide?"

Don't set up too close.
Don't set up too far away.
Don't forget your water or snacks.
Don't make noise, talk, or move around alot.
Don't limit your vision to tunnel vision, try to set up to see at least 180 degrees around you.
Don't disturb anything that you don't have to like cleaning glass to see out of, breaking limbs, stomping grass etc.

"I figure that we all do long range shooting and the majority of us here are competent at shooting beyond 500 yards. But what about once we get to a location to shoot, what is involved to creating an ideal situation to shoot from."

I wasn't paranoid during Y2K but I thought that the BG's might be out to get me. I now know EVERY quality FFP in this neighborhood area and can get there without even my neighbors knowing it. There are four FFP's that I can cover every entrance to my AO. I can move from FFP to FFP without attracting any attention. I did this by walking it day after day at various times of the day, in various types of weather. I also had 5 routes to get to my mothers house from two different locations, which is across town and had FFP's there also.

You can't guess at this game. You have to use all the intell available. If there is none available, you have to use your imagination.
 

Damn, that was pretty good poop for a rookie, Bolt out!
 

Bolt <reeldoctor@mindspring.com>
NC, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 21:32:59 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.50.55.218)

Killflash: checked their site and compared Leupold objective specs. Looks like you could turn the $35 unit on a lathe to where it would work on VariX 2 & 3 units. Anyone try it yet? Emailed them to see if they'd say anything.

Pablito: would you sell off one of your dust collecting loopy ARD's to provide dimensions for alterations to Killflash M1's????

Thanks guys.
WR Moore <wrmoore2001@yahoo.com>
VA, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 21:52:40 (ZULU) (your host address: 158.106.50.3)

Took your advice of a couple days back. Called Garth Kendig at Lupita and asked about sun shades for the M1/M3 LR scopes. Loopy will re-do your "old" scopes for $31 and sell you a shade for $26. The shades are the ones that fit the MK IV and not the regular ones. He claims a turn-around time of one week for the mod. He wasn't sure when the new scopes would come out with the thread adapter installed. Have to use up all of the old parts before you go with the new ones! Guess I'll have to send off my new scope for the mod before I hang it on my new toy!

Time to resume "Happy Hour",

Doc <docs@fidnet.com>
The windy Ozark boonies, MO, USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 23:05:52 (ZULU) (your host address: 216.229.72.207)

Magpul pouches- Correct-an M-16 pouch will not cut it no matter how. The design of the clip does not allow enough room for magpul loops and the magpuld width themselves prevent carrying three in that pouch. A suggestion-if going military equipement-is to use a 308 pouch.

You have three other options:
1) Eagle and Blackhawk are now supposed to be making some of their pouch designs MAgpul compatable. You will have to call and ask. LBT will do anything in any design you ask for very quickly. All good companies.
2) A pouch design with the little "A3" clip can have the upper clip taken off the lid and resewn onto a lower position on the lid-giving you the room you need. My tailor did this for me on Eagle designs.
3) Heresy now--use a velcro adjustable lid. The type that connects the lid to a velcro strip on the pouch front. Yep-noisy. I ask you this though...having to get a new magazine kind of presupposes that you emtied your first magazine in a noisy manner. I don't think the velcro sound would matter much at that point. And some of the better velcro ones come with a one way snap to make sure the lid doesn't come off while crawling.

Personally- I use a thigh pouch (as you know Bravo) so I can lie prone without too many magazines digging into my ribs. I like the Eagle stuff for that. Those of you with short legs (Bravo) and like to carry two mags and a mildot/map/etc on a thigh pouch-look at the LBT product #LBTC-0210B. I am buying that to field test also (and no Bravo-you can't have it afterwards).

Take care-Mike T
Mike T <Riflemike@home.com>
USA - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 23:09:37 (ZULU) (your host address: 65.11.197.193)

Titan - Did not forget Ken M was right - they (HSM 77grs) miked out at the same as SS109 (C77 at least) - but forgot what exactly that was.
Kevin of the GWN <bolandks@home.com>
Canada - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 at 23:51:58 (ZULU) (your host address: 24.71.223.140)

Kevin R. Mussack (Andy's Dad) <kmussack@aol.com>
Clifton Springs, New York, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 00:02:57 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.194.211)

Oh yeah- I am calling up the big boss for your behalf tomorrow...let you know if I get anywhere or shot down in flames.

Mike T
Mike T <Riflemike@home.com>
USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 00:46:32 (ZULU) (your host address: 65.11.197.193)

WR Moore: I like your take on barrel break in. The first 20 rounds down the tube of my M-25 was at the all-fleet, took 5th place. That was also the "testfire" before it was sent to me. He included the scoring disc, 'cause the spindle was shot out of it. It's gotten much better with time.

Mike: I've been playing with that thigh mag holder on the days when it's NOT snowing (stopped yesterday) and I've only got 2 complaints. First off, I can't get it to stay put on the belt, and second it gets in the way of my BDU leg pockets. I'm messing with different ways of keeping it in place, 'cause after messing around with it, I LIKE IT! I'm betting that one of those velcro double belt deals would keep it locked RIGHT where set, but I've not messed with that yet. Still, good idea!

Sir Wes: got the '14 mag holder, I've got to say, when I took it out of the envelope, I didn't think I'd like it. I've tried the thermoplastic holsters, and don't like them. Then I got to looking at how it was made, and the phrase that sticks in my mind is "WELL thought out!". I noticed that it fits better on my gunbelt than my regular pants belt, but this isn't anything to think about. It doesn't have that standard "SLURRREPTTH!" sound when you take the mag out either ;-) It's held tight enough to not worry about running and doing other gymnastics with, but not so tight that it can't be pulled right out easily! Very well done! I'm going to wear it on the next IDPA shoot, just to see how it does the run-&-gun, but right now my estimation is that it's actually something that I'd use! HA! Actually that's saying something there. As you said, JUST the ticket for a nice brisk walk in the woods.

Andy's Dad: the guy I got my M-14 mag pouches from does custom work. I'd give you his number and e-mail, but he answers neither for the last month or so now. Thus I'm having my local seamstress do it, using my old medium Alice for material. Unless someone has another contact for custom pouches and such.
Bravo (who MIGHT be back) <Bravo762@yahoo.com>
Still in Arlen, Texas, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 01:00:05 (ZULU) (your host address: 209.180.85.75)

Loads are: Federal Case
CCI standard primers (250??)
Sierra MK168
42.5 gr IMR 4320 and
40.5 gr IMR 3031

Example: Shooting at Camp Butner, moving from the 200 to the 600 I have to dial in 13.25 MOA
Paul <paulcockerham@att.net>
Reston, VA, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 01:11:24 (ZULU) (your host address: 12.91.132.220)

Glad you got, and like, the M-14 holders. My reaction was same as yours...typical kydex construction, BUT the difference is in the execution. Glad I have two...

Yes, they are made for the 1 3/4" instructor belt. That's what I wear instructing and in the field and specified. Can be made for any belt width. Bet they can even do the Alice Clip thing, if you want.

Like you, I'm impressed. The holders grip the magazine firmly and stay positioned properly. I'm thinking of a double arrangement in a drop down thigh rig for CQB work might be the ticket...M-16 version, of course! I have tested the MP-5 version...it's every bit as good.

'Lito,

Thanks for the M70 trigger instructions. Simple. Even "watashi wa" can understand, ne?

Plan on adjusting over the weekend. Am waiting for my steel trigger guard and hex head screws for the M70 to arrive. Will do it all at once and torque to 65 inch pounds...

All for now,

Wes
Wes Howe <wsaa@proaxis.com>
Blodgett, OR, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 01:54:29 (ZULU) (your host address: 198.145.248.199)

Today Colonel Bob Hoidahl assumed command of the US Army Marksmanship Unit at Fort Benning, Georgia, from Colonel Arch Arnold. Prior to that, I got to generally pester and make myself a pain in the ass to some of the gunsmiths and custom ammo guys of the USAMU "Skunk Works" over some of the new sniper gear they're building for Special Forces.

NICE stuff!

They call the 6.5 x 284 for 1,000 yards the "Fag Mag," because it does everything the 300 Win Mag does, as flat, and not as wind sensitive, without knocking you silly.

Some of the things that they had laid out would make most of the regulars go "Ooooooh."

Looks like Phil Seeberger's OPSINC supporessors and muzzle brakes are still very popular.

Other stuff that's way cool, but if I told you about it they'd have to cut off my head and lock it in the safe. But wow! Eventually you'll see it in the magazines or on TV.

Amazing that for 24 years I've been paid to think of better ways to solve certain cross-cultural communications problems with small arms, and these guys can quickly crank out a prototype in steel, synthetic, brass, bullets, and powder. What a great bunch of guys. Truly a Gun Queer's heaven.
 

Sinister Dave <mliwanag@nc.rr.com>
USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 02:00:10 (ZULU) (your host address: 66.26.22.240)

What's the altitude and temperature at Camp Butner? Did you input those to the JBM calculator?
BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
Austin, Republic of Texas - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 02:05:57 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.217.73.251)

Good call. I first used the default settings for that information and that gave me the #s previously posted. Then I punched in info as close as I could remember. I THINK: Butner is in the eastern part of NC so alt is probably 500 - 1000ft, temp that day was probably 75 deg with at least that in humidity. Sorry for the loose info but this was last year, late summer early fall. With this info plugged in the velocity was still north of 2,500. Thanks.

Bolt

Saw your post about the NC 1000 State Championships, you going to be there? I grew up not too far from Wilkesboro and family still there. Be a good excuse to go visit for the weekend.
Paul <paulcockerham@att.net>
USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 02:27:10 (ZULU) (your host address: 12.91.132.145)

Hank <hank@vocallect.com>
USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 02:58:00 (ZULU) (your host address: 65.7.134.51)

Two Shoes

Terry <tls8323@cs.com>
USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 04:36:46 (ZULU) (your host address: 205.188.195.44)

What general advice can you give me for teaching someone to shoot for the first time? I've never personally had much formal instruction - aside from when I was qualified on the M16 and M9 a couple of years ago, and some skeet lessons a few years before that - so I don't have many examples to follow. Any comments are welcome.

Very respectfully,
Scott Eschenbrenner <wse_ozzy99@hotmail.com>
Annapolis, MD, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 04:43:28 (ZULU) (your host address: 131.122.33.171)

The Fag Mag? TOTALLY laughed my ass off! Didya run into Master Rick or "Hook" while thar? I am currently heading for the South Mountain Bunker and going DEEP to await incoming for deriding the hee-hee, snicker, ho-ho,
 

Sir Wes,
Stans already started whining about Kydex "pop", Thats the last darn thing I'd worry about if I needed another 20 rounds of .308......
 

Un-Dude,
I doubt that I could do the new sling justice, No squirtgunz in my larder :-(
 

Chao!
 

peteR <PNGREIFF@AOL.COM>
Big City, By-Gawd, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 10:48:20 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.213.183)

Boomhauer wrote:
"It's held tight enough to not worry about running and doing other gymnastics with, but not so tight that it can't be pulled right out easily! "

Oh-kay so sue me, I took it out of context.............?
 

RFLMAO!
 
 

peteR <PNGREIFF@AOL.COM>
Ugh Oh City, By-Gawd, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 10:54:02 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.213.183)

Sorry I missed your Q. earlier. The can weighs about 1 1/2 pounds, and is almost 8 in. long. It is quickly removable, so you don't necessarily have to lug your rifle is that configuration. Have not tried it at long range. Accuracy does not seem to be degraded much at 100 yards or less.

Mike
BMG Mike <bmgman@swbell.net>
Austin, Republic of Texas - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 12:30:15 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.217.73.251)

First off, thanks for the input from everyone who decided to take the time and answer my question. I really appreciate it.

Second, I must say, since Ken put in the password, the site has been enjoyable to read. No more nonsense here to shift through.

Third, I spoke to the Undude the other day about the new M40A3 from the Marine Corps. He told me that the STA guys hate it. I am wondering if there are any current STA guys who frequent this site that can provide us their thoughts on their new rifle. However, if not, but there are others on the site that have seen, touched or played with the rifle I would like to hear your thoughts and opinions too.

Mag Pulls --

Here is my two cent on this. When I was in the fleet, I would tape the mags with duck tape. I found that when I used 550 cord, that at times they would be difficult to grab, and when I did grab it, at times the cord would break loose from the duck tape :( Bad idea, very bad idea. I did three things to remedy the retreival of my mags in haste. 1st, I cut the damn nylon divider in my ammo pouch. It is a good idea to befriend a supply guy or one of the guys who work in the warehouse to provide extras for inspections. 2nd, is to just use duck tape as a mean of grabbing the magazine. 3rd, instead of facing the magazine out board, I faced them forward for easy retrieval; that is why I cut the nylon dividers. Once again, my two cents and my experience...

Darren...
Semper Fi

Darren <ddong@usmc.net>
San Francisco, CA, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 12:58:46 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.211.20.29)

I also had one 400yd group down that was 2.73" with a note that 4 were under 2". I had also shot a couple of groups with 168s that same day and they were a tad tighter averageing in the .6 MOA range at 400yds so since I only shot the one group of 155s it really doesn't tell us much.

I hope to get out when it drys up and try them at the longer ranges with both 46.5 and 47grs. I won't load them down any lower because then I feel that we loose what were trying to gain here by going to the lighter bullets.

Hank..
The 6.5 bullet is lighter, in the 140 to 142gr range, but it is very long and thin and has a very high BC usually in the .540 to .620 range compared to the .450 and .496 of the 168s and 175s of the 308s.

Tony..
I had forgot, the other day you had asked about the bigger recoil lug on the 308s, if it was worth it or helped. I have one on mine and my 260 and they are both Darrel Hollands (He built the guns) and his theory is that the bigger lug is better for bedding plus they are trued and have a taper to them which makes it easier to remove the action from the beddded stock. Hope this helps!!
Pat <mrbullet@hotmail.com>
USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 13:31:02 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.41.18.3)

I also had one 400yd group down that was 2.73" with a note that 4 were under 2". I had also shot a couple of groups with 168s that same day and they were a tad tighter averageing in the .6 MOA range at 400yds so since I only shot the one group of 155s it really doesn't tell us much.

I hope to get out when it drys up and try them at the longer ranges with both 46.5 and 47grs. I won't load them down any lower because then I feel that we loose what were trying to gain here by going to the lighter bullets.

Hank..
The 6.5 bullet is lighter, in the 140 to 142gr range, but it is very long and thin and has a very high BC usually in the .540 to .620 range compared to the .450 and .496 of the 168s and 175s of the 308s.

Tony..
I had forgot, the other day you had asked about the bigger recoil lug on the 308s, if it was worth it or helped. I have one on mine and my 260 and they are both Darrel Hollands (He built the guns) and his theory is that the bigger lug is better for bedding plus they are trued and have a taper to them which makes it easier to remove the action from the beddded stock. Hope this helps!!
Pat <mrbullet@hotmail.com>
USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 13:31:18 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.41.18.3)

Guys the M40A3 Rifle uses same basic stock that is in the review section under "McMillan A4". I love that stock no matter what Col.Chandler says.

The scope being used on the final project is up in the air. Right now they are putting the new and rebuilt, by US Optics, M40A1 scopes on the rifles.

The bbls are Scheider.

The Bases and floor metal are DD Ross.

The rings were GGxG but that may be changed to ?

No worries Darren.

Undude
MikeMiller <Tactical@Tacticalintervention.com>
Calif, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 13:58:43 (ZULU) (your host address: 148.165.85.148)

http://communities.prodigy.net/sportsrec/gz-m40a3.html

Interesting how individuals have different view points.

Darren...
Semper Fi
Darren <ddong@usmc.net>
San Fran, CA, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 14:15:11 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.211.20.29)

Jerry
Jerry Rice <nor-cal@worldnet.att.net>
American Canyon, CA, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 15:04:30 (ZULU) (your host address: 12.81.87.28)

Well, there is no such critter as STA(Surveillence and Target Aquisition) anymore, we're all Scout-Sniper platoons, just thought I'd pass the word. Phased out ground radar and some other gear, so it's just snipers left, so the name changed.

As for the M40A3, you have to look at it like this: I love the idea that I'm finally getting new stuff, some of the M40A1's are REALLY clapped out. I sent a Marine to the 1st Rgt S/S school and they had one rifle there with the bolt attached to the rifle with 550cord because the bolt release was broken. That's unsat. The rifles in my platoon are mostly OK, it's minor stuff like rough cocking cams, and worn bolt guideways that sometimes make life difficult. Bolt binding and rounds crossbridging in the magwell are just a PITA. You have to realize that most of these receivers are from 1968 time frame. That being the case, the M40A3 will be a great thing since it's brand new.

OTOH, it's too damned heavy. I think the USMC gurus payed entirely too much attention to civilian tactical shooters and looked too much at the crap the MEU(SOC)'s have been doing. Yeah, a 18+lbs bench gun is great for banging Sammis and Liberians off the third floor of the embassy, but it's going to suck ass out in the field where you have to hump three-five days worth of water and batteries for the PRC104's and 119's. I think the stock is going to be an improvement, I think the suppressor is awesome and should have been done years ago(I actually was in the process of submitting a position paper to Rgt PLEADING for suppressed weapons when I heard that the M40A3 was going to be suppressed, I still think I'll ask for suppressors for the M9's, but it's no longer so urgent). I think the scope rail is a good idea, as is the mount for the Simrad(the armourers used to confiscate those if you didn't remove them when the rifles were sent to RTE armourers) But to be honest, I can't give you a real opinion until they get issued, which will be God-knows-when. After the platoon humps them around for a while, I'm sure I'll hear all about it. Semper Fidelis...
 

Ken M <target1371@aol.com>
IL, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 15:30:08 (ZULU) (your host address: 24.4.253.164)

I think this whole issue on the M40A3 has been blown out of proportion. Hell I dont think there is an issue. The concept is solid. The idea of the suppressor is excellent. The stock is the best damm prone field stock I have ever used. Metal you could drive nails with and scopes you could break 2x4's with. What the heck is wrong with that? I have not weighed one yet, but I believe the 17lbs is with the suppressor not without. The stock weighs 3lbs 4oz. The scope 2 3/4lbs and the bbl is about a number 7 taper at 24". That does not add up to 17lbs unless the floor metal and scope base about 5-7lbs, and that they dont.

I am looking forward to useing the system. Basically it is my NorCal NightHawk with a different bbl and floor metal. The Nighthawk has held up well so no worries.

Undude done for the day. Back to slings
MikeMiller <Tactical@tacticalintervention.com>
Calif, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 16:08:55 (ZULU) (your host address: 148.165.85.148)

Unsat??!! Whoah!! Ken, you have gift for understatement.

CDC' <criscurt@isu.edu>
USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 16:17:59 (ZULU) (your host address: 134.50.253.13)

As for STA, let put this to rest now by saying I am the culprit that said it and not Mike. That was how I knew it back in the 80's. Sorry Mike for that one.

As for the condition of the Scout Sniper's rifle, wow what an eye opener is an understatement from me. I never knew that it was that bad until now. It is nice to hear about the conditions of our Marines and Soldiers and sad to know at the same time too. It is also nice to know what conditions their weapons are in so that we can better judge what we write on this site. Given what I have read this morning, moving to the M40A3 is the ideal thing to do given the current situation in the Scout Sniper Platoons. The weight is my only concern...

Darren...
Semper Fi
Darren <ddong@usmc.net>
San Fran, CA, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 16:33:27 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.211.20.29)

I didn't mean to imply that the USMC sniper community is using crap rifles because that is not the case at all. It's just that some of the M40A1's are OLD, and they are just worn out. There is no getting around it. 30 years of sand, dust, filth and surface rust takes a toll. These rifles get lots and lots of field use, and guys using them don't really like sending them to the RTE because then they're gone for 8-12 monthes. So they make them last longer than they should. My rifle right now, #221379 works fine, it's bolt isn't as smooth as my M70 match rifle, but that's because the cocking cam isn't quite right and the bolt has some wobble because the rails have been worn out over the last 30 years. It still hits what I aim at. I was making 900+yd hits at Hawthorne, Nevada last year. That nasty high angle stuff that is being discussed. Well, the math they taught us worked fine. I was making occasional 1100+ yd hits at CAX the year prior, and the wind was blowing something fierce. So the rifle's still work(most of them). I have one brand new rifle in the platoon, it has a Schnieder tube. The older guns use Harts. They both work just fine.

Undude, I haven't touched or felt the new rifle yet. I sincerly hope the weight numbers I've received are wrong and that 18.5lb number is a complete system number(can and Simrad) Jane's was saying 14.5lbs and I hope they are right. But until they actually get issued, I won't know. As I said, I reserve judgement. And I'll be sure to relay all the good and bad points that my platoon brings up when they are issued. Semper Fidelis...
Ken M <target1371@aol.com>
IL, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 19:03:51 (ZULU) (your host address: 24.4.253.164)

The team got together and decided that only commissioned officers are fully qualified to carry the breaching gear.
 

Dope it, Dial it, Dump it

CT
Cory Trapp <Cory_Trapp@email.msn.com>
Paulden, AZ, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 19:56:20 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.86.140.51)

I have a Max HV installed, which is 26", and is one size Larger than the typical contour used in past M40A1's........
With 6.5x20 LRT, badgers, rings, and mounts.....weighs in at 17#'s...even.

No sling.

Steel TG by Tactical rifle stocks....one piece John Baier model.
Don't know if this sheds any light on the subject but I thought I'd throw er' out.........
 

Two Shoes
terry <tls8323@cs.com>
USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 21:35:39 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.213.214)

Sorry 'bout that, I wasn't trying to involve you with my .308 Win project, I'll have the work done on that rifle at H-S, and yes I know the 1/12" shoots the 175's just fine, but I didn't say I was shooting 175's, did I?

The project I was sending out is the 6.5 X 284, I don't have a chamber reamer for that round.

later
 

JR <jr_rcsd@hotmail.com>
rapid city, sd, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 22:42:44 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.34.14.24)

Kevin of the GWN - thanks for the info, I have some SS109 to mic if I understand you correctly.
 

Later

Titan
Titan <hatherly1@home.com>
Winddddddddyyyyyyy Michigan, USA - Thursday, April 12, 2001 at 23:09:34 (ZULU) (your host address: 24.4.252.150)

Mike
MikeMiller <Tactical@tacticalintervention.com>
Calif, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 00:05:41 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.201.203)

Sir Wes: A double in AR might not be too bad at all, a double for 20's would be just fine I'd think! A double for M-14's, I'm guessing, would pull my pants down too much. I say that, 'cause when I tried carrying ammo on my pants belt (with no suspenders), I was hitching 'em up continuously. For '14 mags, I can't fathom how this could be any better. Maybe special fit to the belt width, but THAT is it!

Patron Dave: I'm enthused about the "fag mag", but that doesn't mean I want to take long hot showers with anyone (well, maybe Kathy Ireland ;-)).

PeteR: I don't have any of my GOOOOOOOOD beer left, I've got to do some TIIIIIIIME on the press to load up all this Varget I boooooought, the thumb safety on my 1911 abraids my thuuuuuuuuumb, and I've got to pay yearly rent to the state guuuuuuuvmint on my car. Now THAT'S whining!
 

Boomhauer (Bravo) <Bravo762@yahoo.com>
Arlen, Texas, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 00:46:33 (ZULU) (your host address: 209.180.85.113)

Pass on the reversable stuff from US CAv or BQ....it is more light duty than you want. Your first expedition into the woods wil result in your first trip to the tailor. If you are interested drop me a line and I will get you the contact info for really good reversable woodland/black Goretex. All the reversable stuff, by design, have long term wicking problems though. It is also heavier than the regular stuff. Yep-we are getting this stuff for the knuckle draggers...lol

Mike T
Mike T <Riflemike@home.com>
USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 00:56:48 (ZULU) (your host address: 65.11.197.193)

If I had MY say on the design of this dudeski...it would have an A3 forearm,and A3 cheekpiece, and then I would say magnifique!!!!!!!!.

This, would have cut off at least 10-12 ounces, and gave it much better position shooting qualities IMHO, which don't mean Squat.

But, as she sits, I can see it will shine in the prone.
I expect recoil of maybe a 22-250..or less.

After I read your post, I took mine down for some minor alterations, and weighed er' again.....with a BR bipod, non swivel 5.5 exactly.
this is of course including bedding Tit Dev.

Two Shoes
Terry <tls8323@cs.com>
USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 03:30:13 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.213.184)

We finally have excellent brass from Norma and exceddingly good factory ammo from Jeff Hoffman's Black Hills Ammunition. The round has come of age.

JR, Dave Kiff, at Pacific Precision, made my reamer and does stellar work. He made the reamers for Black Hill's ammo and they are cut for the AOL of the Black Hills round, at 2.980" OAL. If you need contact info I can supply it.

I'm actually considering building a second 6.5 just for back up and use as an understudy gun to my Chandler rifle, but that will have to wait until my professional life gets settled. As for now I have rifles to keep me busy and happy smelling powder smoke and Hoppe's #9...;-)

Semper Fi,

Wes
Wes Howe <wsaa@proaxis.com>
Blodgett, OR, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 04:49:39 (ZULU) (your host address: 198.145.248.56)

Pacific Precision makes a few bore reamers for us now and then, I know our reamer maker deals with Dave now and then. I didn't know they made the chamber reamer for Jeff out at Black Hills Ammo. Shouldve just asked him the last time he was in. It's all about paying attention, eh.. Definitely building this thing now, if Jeff's got this worked out with the military as far as ammo specs, and he's about 5 minutes from me, hoo yeah. I'll give Dave a call when I get geared up for this project, I still have to rip the 300 win mag barrel off of ol' 'Betty Nugs', she was a good ol' gal, I'm gonna miss her. Hey, thanks a million for the info, made my day, I can the light at the end of the tunnel now!!

later
 
 
 

JR <jr_rcsd@hotmail.com>
Rapid city, sd, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 05:10:37 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.34.14.24)

Now THATS whining! ;-)
 
 
 

ALL:

HAVE A HAPPY EASTER HOLIDAY WEEKEND WITH YOUR FAMILIES AND FRIENDS, AND PLEASE BE CAREFUL ON THE HIGHWAYS AND BY-WAYS.

Even if you shoot a Fag Mag! hee-hee
 
 

peteR <PNGREIFF@AOL.COM>
I GOT YOUR STEENKEN CLUCKING WABBIT here in Big City, By-Gawd, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 10:54:33 (ZULU) (your host address: 205.188.193.169)

Andy got another call from a neighbor last night to come "take care of" a woodchuck. He responded with his .223 loaded with 40 grain HPs. OSOK....the neighbor gave him $5 for his trouble. Where was that kind of work when I was 15?

I'll be picking up one of my .45s from the smith today. Brand new Novak tritium sights and a trigger job....can't wait to wring it out this weekend.

It looks like the ground is drying up enough to get on our new range and hang some steel. If I can get the boy away from that female freind of his long enough to help it will get done.

I've been giving the "Sniper Challenge" shoot a hard look. It seems like a great time from what I've read. All shooting without the stalks, KIMS or Target Detection exercises. I hear good things about it. Being in October it's tough to get my spotter out of school for it especially after missing days the month before for the "Rendezvous". Anybody from here plan on attending?

Have a Good Friday.

Kevin R. Mussack (Andy's Dad) <kmussack@aol.com>
Clifton Springs, New York, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 11:32:58 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.80.33.70)

"Fag Mag" is this a San Francisco rifle? I am just old fashioned and slow to change so I will stick with the 300 Win for now. With that said if I was starting now I would go with the 6.5x284 instead. With Black Hills ammo around you are certain to get great results. I just picked up some of Black Hills 223 Rem 62 grain reloads and the stuff shoots like match. It is also a pleasure to deal with a shooter who makes the stuff and not a Corp. BoZo.
Wes, you keep talking and it will cost me building a 6.5x284.

I would like to share with you a letter I got from the Accurate Rifle yesterday. Well only a small part of it. In short the letter said that Precision Shooting lost huge money on Tactical Shooter and the new magazine is making money. They went on to say that the few tactical articles they run are not going over well and they wont make the mistake of being a tactical magazine again.

Dave I know you get told what is said on here so here it goes. SHAME ON YOU! You had something you did not understand and never gave it a chance. If you had run all tactical articles and not "Me and my jack knife were hunting flys in the front room", you would have done well. You went after the wrong advertisers and of course no sniper is going to buy a 1200.00 powder measure. Thats for Bench Rest Geeks. You could have secured Black Hawk, Eagle, HxS Precision, US Optics McMillan and many others that sell tactical equipment and done well. I can tell you the snipers buy lots of gear just not Bench Rest crap.

Looks like you did OK on Mike Lau's book. Who the heck purchased that, if it was not snipers?

I like many others do not and never will fit into the new/rehashed magazine. You see I write about sniping not rubber band guns.

Now Flame away boys

Undude
MikeMiller <tactical@tacticalintervention.com>
Calif, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 12:48:38 (ZULU) (your host address: 148.165.85.148)

Hoooyahhh! Mike...tell it like it is.

The PS guy is actually PC.

My opinion is that the end of TS was a self fullfilling prophecy.

I spoke with "Dave" once about ideas for TS and he was quite negative about anything not directly related to rifles. He claimed he didn't want articles on related equipment or tactic, then he'd run just such an article. Go figure.

I'd love to see someone create a magazine to take over where TS left off. Solid no BS articles about the craft without the commercial hype of a G&A. I wonder if Bob Brown reads this board??? Pete Kokalis would make a great editor. Mr. Dillon could be the art director. ;-)

out
Kevin R. Mussack (Andy's Dad) <kmussack@aol.com>
Clifton Springs, New York, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 13:05:28 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.80.33.70)

JR..
In all the reasearch that I did when building mine, I came to the same conclusions as Wes, have Pacific build your reamer. You will love the 6.5x284 it smacks steel like a 300WM but is gentle on the shoulder.
Pat <mrbullet@hotmail.com>
USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 13:11:05 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.41.18.3)

And, also more than a few are switching to this combo, for ease of reloading, and less expensive rounds.( From the 6.5x284)

And I'm told, that the ballistics, and capabilities are roughly eqivalent.

With much less recoil, and far cheaper components.

And on the short action.......what's yer take??.

I haven't crunched the numbers, or run the ballistics comparisons as of yet, but sounds vellllyy interesting.

Two Shoes
Terry <tls8323@cs.com>
USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 13:26:03 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.213.188)

I can see his side of it, and I think there were other issues.
First off... after the first year or so, the articles went down hill really fast... I remember one that was a "comparison" of cleaning brushes... by a guy that knew nothing about cleaning a rifle!!!

When you have a cover photo of a five LE "Snipers" on a fire escape, dressed in green wookie suits, and the building is RED BRICK... gimme' a friggin break... that means you are running out of articles, and the end is near.

A publisher has to have a lot of GOOD incoming articles in order to run a magazine.
Dave can't write the stuff himself. The last year and a half, the articles were really trash (except for the ones from our guys ;).
And even if they weren't, how many articles can you write about using Mildots... there are few true tactical scopes, and bins... so after six or eight issues, there goes the optics reviews (and optical advertizing).
Many tac shooters don't reload... they're just in LE, or Military, and can't, or have little or no interest, so there goes the loading articles (and reloading advertizing).

Advertizers LOVE people that spend money (on their stuff)... We're dead beat, cheap skates... some of love the art (and a lot of those congregate here on SC), but most tac shooters around the country own one rifle, one scope (A Tabasco), don't reload, or if they do, bought the minimum kit, and won't persue it further... That's it!

I guy misses a deer, WHOA MOMMA!!! a new scope, new rifle in a new caliber, so new dies, new bullets, new powder for the bigger cases, yadda... he just spent BIG money cuz he missed

On the other hand, a Tac shooter doesn't do well at a match, and he just goes home, and comes back next time with the same stuff... an LE shoots a 1.25" group at quals, no big deal... no new scope or rifle, no new stuff at all.

We can't expect the publishers to cater to our needs for free... and they don't make the money on subscriptions, they make it on advertizine.
We don't have the writers, we don't have the volume of readers, and we don't spend the money... that adds up to failure for a publisher.

I know... you disagree ;))

'lito
 

Pablito <condor@mags.net>
USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 13:51:30 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.43)

Now with TS gone we are given the occasional bone by AR to try and keep us giving our money to them, with a promise that it may come back. Me I am through, nothing to do with the new magazine. It is neither fish or fowl. I predict it will be gone in less than tqwo years, Precision Shooting, a great Magazine does the job AR is trying to do so why bother.

Dave you have ahd a winner with Precision Shooting. Bring back Tactical Shooter and get the correct advertisers so it will make you some money. The Accurate Rifle will die under the current direction.

On another note Peter K., would be a great writer in any gun magazine!
I have read and enjoyed his technical articles for many years and I hope many years to come. He is also a very helpful guy. Long Live Peter (certainly not a Reserve PD Major of a six man department)
MikeMiller <Tactical@tacticalintervention.com>
Calif., USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 14:03:38 (ZULU) (your host address: 148.165.85.148)

We disagree. The sniper companies are as busy as hell selling product. How many rifles and scopes to do own yourself. Me I dont want to count them. The sniper rifle is like the bass boat of the 80's. Many guys are purchasing them for just fun and that means many items will be sold to complete the packages. I look at who buys my slings. I sell them to people from all walks of life and many countries. I dont even advertise other than my website and word of mouth.

I am telling you people/shooters like gear and they will spend money on good stuff. If it was like Dave put it and you have bought into, you could walk into Chandlers place and he would beg you to buy something at a reduced rate, to keep from going broke. Just call him or any of the good builders and ask for an ETA on getting a rifle.

Ask Rod Ryan how his classes are going. He is always teaching these days. Ask US Optics, Nightforce or any other sniper scope manufacture if they have trouble selling scopes. They dont.

Blackhawk and Eagle are busy as hell making gear for the tactical community. They seem to sell it as fast as they can make it.

Whos making the purchases if we are all to cheap to buy anything?

I teach guys that everytime I look at them they have something new to show me. Holsters, vests, drag bags, temp gauges, cleaning equipment, rifles, scopes or this or that device. This stuff sells well to snipers and tactical guys. We just dont buy Bench rest crap!

Undude
MikeMiller <tactical@tacticalintervention.com>
Calif, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 14:15:39 (ZULU) (your host address: 148.165.85.148)

To those who may have contacts with those in power at the publication, has anyone asked if it could be a quarterly mag? And, if so how many articles would be needed? And, could those on the site devote enough of their time to author the necessary articles?

The reason I bring up these points is that if the magazine is for those like most of us that frequent the site or have contacts with others that could contribute, articles and advertisement, then maybe it could be revived!

Just a thought...
Byron <byburnham@earthlink.net>
CA, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 15:21:10 (ZULU) (your host address: 24.41.41.50)

I toyed with the idea of building one in a 6.5 when I looked at the 6.5x284 but I hated the idea of fire forming all the brass. I think it would be very effecient and probably would approach velocities of the 6.5x284.

I believe Bill Shehane is building what he calls a "Short" 6.5x284 and its very close to the 243Imp case. I don't think they would work well on the short action though because you would want to seat the bullet out as far as possible to get all the case cap. that you could.

Mike..
I agree with you on this issue. I think that Dave went after the wrong people to advertise in the TS. There were several times I wanted to find a company and looked in the mag and they or any others like them were not to be found.

I agree with what 'litos saying to a point, but we do buy and right now tactical shooting is the rage. You have a lot of guys out there that want to be "Snipers" or long range shooters and if you have something that will make it easier for them you can sell it!!
Pat <mrbullet@hotmail.com>
USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 16:31:59 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.41.18.3)

Jeez Man... You're such a hard headed pain in the butt ;))

Lookie... a publisher/editor can only do what they are good at... Dave Brennen is good at publishing rifle shooting magazines... and he is responsible for what comes out of it.
He doesn't know how to even edit other stuff, or judge the quality of the submitted articles.
For example, he has some guy that is a benchrest shooter, writing "Optical" reviews for PS... the guy doesn't know doodly squat about optics, but fills his articles with phrases like "Spherical aberration", and "Curvature of field"... phrases from photography magazines that he doesn't understand, and that don't apply to rifle scopes... but the readers eat that shit up, cuz it sounds "scientific!"... Dave doesn't know the difference, cuz Dave Brennen doesn't understand the articals.

The tactical field ISN'T about rifles and scopes... that's only a part of it... and Dave Brennen isn't able to publish a magazine on tactics, stalking, Tactical Pack reviews, cuz he has now way of knowing if the artical is BS, or the real skinny... and you can't go on the "Reputation" of the writer... as an editor, you must be able to over see the quality of the magazine, you MUST be able to understand most of what's submitted, or you will look bad (which is why his scope reviews are worthless)... so he stays with rifles, and does very well.

OK... on to what you said.

>"The sniper companies are as busy as hell selling product. How many rifles and scopes to do own yourself. Me, I don't want to count them."<

Neither do I... I really tried last year to get an inventory, and write down all the serial numbers, and couldn't.
But, I don't buy from magazine adds, and neither do you. I'm a life member of the NRA (for 36 years), and I don't read their magazine hardly ever... most don't even get opened once, before they go into the trash. It's not because of the NRA... it's because there is a SERIOUS shortage of articulate, knowledgeable, gun writters these days. You can't run a magazine with poorly written, inarticulate articles, no matter how many years the author has had in the buch... it won't work.

The companies that are good (and small) are too busy to worry about advertizing... the little gun shops like TBA, Chandler's... these guys are already behind... some for several YEARS... and they need to spend $1000 a month on advertizing?? I don't think so... because that's just $1000 a month of overhead that goes down the tube for advertizing a product that they can't deliver for 18 months, and anyone that is willing to wait 18 months, already knows about them, and the newbee (who just saw the ad), won't wait for even a few months... you see it on this site... guys don't want to wait a few months for a Stealth, and that's only 700 bucks. It's "I want my gun N-O-W".
Also (and you can see it on this site)... the guys that will spend $3000 to $5000 on a tactical riffle, already know who is building good sticks... the beginners won't spend that kind of loot.

>"The sniper rifle is like the bass boat of the 80's. Many guys are purchasing them for just fun and that means many items will be sold to complete the packages. I look at who buys my slings. I sell them to people from all walks of life and many countries. I dont even advertise other than my website and word of mouth."<

And that's the second problem... the internet has taken away the need for small shops to buy advertizing in magazines... I'll bet you that "WE" (Sniper Country), has sold (like, "Been responsible for") more Mildot Masters, Slope Dopers, Certain Shooting slings (made by a grumpy UnDude;)... and all kinds of other stuff, than all the adds these guys put in Tactical Shooter PUT TOGETHER!!!
Any small product maker can put up a website for less that one months addvertizing in TS, and get hits forever.
Remember that this site IS THE PLACE... we get over 2000 lurkers every day... anyone that is interested in sniping, or tactical shooting, IS HERE.... but if they get some interest, they couldn't find Tactical Shooter on the corner magazine rack... most serious shooters haven't even heard of PS... cuz it ain't on the corner newstand.

>"I am telling you people/shooters like gear and they will spend money on good stuff. If it was like Dave put it and you have bought
into, you could walk into Chandlers place and he would beg you to buy something at a reduced rate, to keep from going broke."<

And I'm telling you, that the guys that are willing to throw $4000 at a rifle, and wait for their kids to get out of college before they pick it up, ALREADY KNOW about these custom builders... they don't need TS to show them an add, and chandler's doesn't need to spend $1000 a month to advertize to the "Choir"... it's already done for them.

>"Just call him or any of the good builders and ask for an ETA on getting a rifle."<... that's right, and so why spend big bucks to advertize to sell riffles you can't deliver... it just pisses people off, and wastes the builders money.

>"Ask Rod Ryan how his classes are going. He is always teaching these days."<

And ask his students "Where did you hear of this course?"

>"Ask US Optics, Nightforce or any other sniper scope manufacture if they have trouble selling scopes. They dont."<

I'm gonna pull rank on you, because I have been running my own business for over 30 years.
You don't throw money at advertizing, when you are selling all you can make... you don't worry about advertizing budgets, when you're 18 months behind in delivering product.
You spend that advertizing money on better machines, better people, or better Pizza for lunch!

I advertize when things are slow... I haven't spent one cent on advertizing in 8 years... not penny one. If I'm slow, I advertize, otherwize I got better places for the money (like 50BMG goodies).

>"Blackhawk and Eagle are busy as hell making gear for the tactical community. They seem to sell it as fast as they can make it."<

Which is why they don't have to spend money advertizing... they have a "custom Department" HA!... I spoke to the custom Department last year, (this is all true!!) and the lady said "I'm sorry, but we are 3 years behind, and just got a new military contract, so I can't even take your order"... this is a company that has to give Dae Brennen $1000 a month to not take orders for 3 yers??

>"Whos making the purchases if we are all to cheap to buy anything?"<

The military, and a small cadre' of serious shooters... us bums... but me, you, and maybe 2 thousand other serious shooters can't keep TS alive.

>"I teach guys that everytime I look at them they have something new to show me. Holsters, vests, drag bags, temp gauges, cleaning equipment, rifles, scopes or this or that device. This stuff sells well to snipers and tactical guys. We just don't buy benchrest crap!"<

And that is the problem... benchrest crap sells like water in the desert... 200 guys show up at a match, and Joe Schmuck wins, and uses "Pablito Dies"... and I'm friggin rich... I'll have 200 orders the next day, and 10,000 when the benchrest magazine publishes the match results... it is this very kind of stuff that put Redding ON THE MAP... before they catered to this crowd, they were dead, and in chapter 11.

Look Dude-ski... there are about 1000 to 2000 SERIOUS sniper/tactical shooters in the country that are willing to lay out their own money for a good kit... not just the scope/riffle, but the packs, and other junk... Everything I want, I can find on the internet... through a business site, or a chat board... it I'm gonna plunk down money for a magazine subscription, I want GOOD articles, and then I'll look at the adds.

TS was killed mainly because the poor articles... they weren't just poor, they were AWFUL.
The first 18 months were good, then it took a header into the crapper... readers don't subscribe for the ads, they subscribe for the articles, the ads come along for the ride.

If the articles were good, the readers would be there, then the advertizers will be there.
Dave Brennen can't edit Tactical articles, because he doesn't understand the art/science of it... he can't judge if a submitted article is good, bad, or raw BS... so there's nothing he could do.

He could have sold it, but to who... and (the great thing about capitalism) if the market is there, capitalism will fill the vacuum, but it didn't, cuz, except for me and thee (the collective :thee), it ain't there.

you can get more information on sniping, tactical matches, and the rest of it, in two days of web surfin' that in reading two years of back issues of TS...

This went way too ling... I quit.

'lito
Pablito <condor@mags.net>
USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 16:45:50 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.43)

When Dave brought out the magazine he should have known what was needed to make it work. If you yourself lack the knowledge, which he admits, you hire someone that has the knowledge. That is the sign of someone truly good at his job as a leader. You know my chief would never tell me what made a good sniper or sniper rifle. He accepts I know and trusts me. That is the way of all things. The ones that do well hire folks to do what is needed, so the poor Dave did not know it was poop thing fails for me. He should have hired someone that knows the tactical field for editing.

While we are on that, why does he still have someone who you say does not know optics writting about them? That goes back to the original problem. By the way I do not read either AR or Precision Shooting anymore so I do not know who you are talking about. I make no judgement of the ones writting now. I lost it over what is the best Fly Shooter thing. I am certain that one attracted many more readers than what the NightHawk device will do for your sniper or varmint rifle. NOT! Lets face it the new mag will not survive. It had a chance under TS but not now. I also agree that Dave has the right to do whatever he wants with his magazine, but when he blames use for his failings I stand up and say. Sorry you got no clothes on.
 

I completely agree on Sniper Country. This is our place and you will see me sending more and more in on what I get to play with. Someone asked why I didn't try and get a Tactical Magazine going. I thought about it an dnow I get it. Because Sniper Country is an on line Sniper Magazine. We share daily what is good, bad and learn as we go. For that I am thankful.

Articles I am working on for SC are:
The Rock Rifle
The 338 Lapua GNA Precision Boulder
Schmidt and Bender 4x16x50 34mm tube PII Scope
HS Precison 338 Lapua
Barrett M99 50Cal

Just need some time to polish them.

MikeMiller <tactical@tacticalintervention.com>
Calif, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 17:45:45 (ZULU) (your host address: 148.165.85.148)

It's so good to see things back to normal........

Lito', & the Undude.......in their Usual prime form!!.

Pat, yeah I can see that,but seems the 6.5x.308 would be a better go.....bigger, booolets, and heavier, better barrel life.

........3800 FPS.............SMOKIN'!!!!!!!!

Change the barrel every 500 rounds???((:

Mike, the McHale, ( never seen one), but in up close looksee appeared the A2, and the A4 were very similar.

Can't figure out why the Corps decided to go with that forend though.

Kevin, (Andy's Dad), I am still curious on your post about the IMI brass.
You " Saw the tell tale ring".
I'm assuming you meant for case head separation......BUT, was this after resizing, how many reloadings????.

Two Shoes
Dos Sopatos
Terry <tls8323@cs.com>
USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 17:59:13 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.205.82)

Never hear from Gooch anymore......?

I picked up the .45 at noon. SWEET!
Those Novak night sights are real quality and BRIGHT!

out
Kevin R. Mussack (Andy's Dad) <kmussack@aol.com>
Clifton Springs, New York, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 18:12:59 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.80.33.70)

>"Pablito/Paul, dude you are about as good at telling me you think I am wrong, without pissing me off, as anyone I have met. I see your point but disagree."<

And you are the most likeable bum that I disagree with... but look at it this way.

I'm not defending Dave Brennen... I think he screwed up big time.
But understand this... Dave has an audience that he publishes to.
you might say that it's the untimate "Wanna bee audience". It's the same audience that the high ticket sports car magazines publish to.

They don't publish to the guys that really drive fast, they publish to the yuppies that have fast cars that they drive to work, and these guys have fantasies about running from the troopers in a radar stop, but don't have the stones.

Even the articles in PS often cross the line, and get ankle deep in BS... but it's nicely worded BS, and the wannabee choir, just eats it up... and (unlike the websites) there's no calling them on their crap... it gets published, and goes down in history as "The TRUTH!".

I have called Dave, and even been to his office, but he has a deaf ear when it comes to major errors in his magazine.

A good example is an article I just read from the Jan 2001 PS:

http://www.snipersparadise.com/tsmag/Jan2001.htm

... written be the same benchrester that does their optical reviews.
Nice pictures, nice wordsmithing (which IS important), but zero information for the tactical shooter.

It was a combination of "I went to a Tactical Match in Texas, cuz I happen to be the only PS writer that lives in Texas... and by the way, I rate it an 85, cuz it has a good beat, and you can dance to it"

It was filler, and none of Dave's readers will know the difference.

When I said you were wrong, I didn't mean that Dave was right... he did what you said... he started a publication on "Sniper stuff" thinking it was about accurate "Green riffles", and had no idea that the riffles were about 20-ish% of it... then he didn't get people that knew the craft to edit, and guide it, and he thought that the same "Gee wizz" stiff that worked for PS would work for TS... but the difference is this...

PS caters to the same "white wine" shooters that the car magazines do... and they don't get dirty shooting, just as they don't outrun troopers from speed traps in their Porches.

TS readers drink beer, and outrun speed traps in cars that look like shit, and run like rum-runners, and out shoot them with riffles that look like crap, and shoot like crazy, and do it from the dirt and brair patches, without excuses.

Dave never understood that, and thought that articles like the one above, would "smoke and mirror" us... and we walked.

>"While we are on that, why does he still have someone who you say does not know optics writting about them?"<

Because there are many people that want to find something/someone to follow... they are born sheeple. they don't try something new, or challenge the known, they sit back and wait for others to tell them "What's cool", and then they throw their master cards at it.
 

>"I completely agree on Sniper Country. Because Sniper Country is an on line Sniper Magazine. We share daily what is good, bad and learn as we go. For that I am thankful."<

Yup... me too.

'lito
Pablito <condor@mags.net>
USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 18:44:11 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.111)

I've reloaded the cases three times. The last batch that came home with me from Badlands last month I tossed in the vibrator and put through my Wilson benchrest neck sizing die. I looked at some of the cases and there was a ring showing on the outside of the case above the expected location which is usually just north of the web. I used a dental explorer and searched for any cracking internally and found none. I don't know what's going on. It wasn't every case. The ring is a lighter brass color and doesn't show any separation (the explorer doesn't catch inside or out).

Other than the reduced powder capacity I have no complaints about the brass. When doing the neck turning the chips came off in a way that you'd expect from a good annealed alloy.

I assure you that if I get a case head separation I'll let the world know. I'll also DX the whole lot after the next firing.

I know Lapua is the best but it is mucho denaro.

Someone mentioned that Winchester brass is good except for case concentricity.

When I hit the lotto I'll just get a pallet of Black Hills and be done with all this reloading stuff. I guess I'll have to buy a ticket first.

out
Kevin R. Mussack (Andy's Dad) <kmussack@aol.com>
Clifton Springs, New York, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 18:58:23 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.80.33.70)

Kevin..
If your interested in a good match with a lot of shooting try the D&L match in Wyoming. Its all shooting for 3 days and you get to shoot your pistol and your assult rifle too. You and Andy can shoot as partners if you want. Its a great shoot and you will meet a lot of great guys.

He is suppose to be changing the format this year so it isn't such a ball buster. He is also going to break it into two classes Military & LE and then civilians. The military wanted to keep it like it was and the civilians wanted it a tad "Milder".

There were several articles in TS about the match if you wanted to find out more about it. I could also send you Daves e.mail address if you were interested, he's a nice guy to talk to.
Pat <mrbullet@hotmail.com>
USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 19:26:24 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.41.18.3)

It will get a ring ( bright spot) above the case head approx 1/4" up.......
I thought the same as you, a while back I did a cutaway, as the inside "feeler", was inconclusive.

There was no evidence whatsoever of immanent C H S.

What I found is the "Bright", spot is where the solid part of the case HEAD, stops the resizing process, and leaves the tell tale ring, just above it, on the actual case body.

Case head sep, would occur if you had trimmed bookoos off after each firing, to get back to length.

If this is / was not the case, then I suspect you have run into the same anomaly that I did.

Let me know if you see incipient REAL signs of CHS....I would like to know.....

For 16.5 cents a case, it's the best bargain out there.

On the Win brass..........don't know where you heard the bad report on concentricity, it's the BEST American brass I have found.....

Black Hills uses it, or at least the last I checked.

In order of quality, this is my experience....Lapua, Norma, Win, IMI Match,Rem, Fed GM....ain't even in the ballgame, as far as concentricity..I have consistently found it to be the WORST.

Fed GM........after initial factory firing, you can loose up to 10-15% of the cases because of soft brass.
And for what it cost's (bulk), it's not even an option.

Outside of "rolling your own ", from the get go, is buy BH, and shoot it through your tube, and then it's already a match for your chamber.

Thanks for the replies guy's..........

Anybody heard from Castillo???((((:

Two Shoes
Terry <tls8323@cs.com>
USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 21:07:04 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.195.214)

1) I got tired of paying for two copies of the same article in both T-S and P-S in supposedly different magazines.

2) WTF articles on hunting flys with a jack knife, and "old guard" articles of NO F@#$%KING relevance to what we wanted.

3) that bullshit job done with pasting your article and Chandlers in a "spank the upstart" style.

4) Articles that had that "suprise" tie in with the advertisers products
 

ofta rant
peteR <PNGREIFF@AOL.COM>
Yeah Bay - Yeaaaah, By Gawd, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 22:19:19 (ZULU) (your host address: 205.188.197.49)

hehehehehe, Bolt off for 3 days, hhhhoooooaaaahhhhh!!!!!
Bolt <reeldoctor@mindspring.com>
NC, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 22:33:07 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.50.55.142)

After I posted the bit about sun-shades for Loopy LR M1's & M3"s on Wednesday I received the following note from Dick at Premier Reticles:

Doc,

We have been doing the same modification for more than a year. $35 if you
send in a scope or $25 installed if you are purchasing a new scope from us.
Takes just a couple of days to your scope.

Leupold got the idea from us.

Dick

Premier Reticles, Ltd.
175 Commonwealth Ct.
Winchester, VA 22602 - USA
(540) 868-2044 Tel.
(540) 868-2045 Fax
www.premierreticles.com

I don't work for them; but I had them put mil-dots in an old 6.5x20 for me a couple of years back, and they do very fast and excellent work.

Off to town for TGIF at the local Moose lodge!
 
 

Doc <docs@fidnet.com>
The sunny Ozark boonies, MO, USA - Friday, April 13, 2001 at 23:13:20 (ZULU) (your host address: 216.229.91.137)

Well I am proud to announce today that I have updated Jerry Rice's website. Nor-Cal Precision now has a new look, a lot better graphics, and an improved layout.

Please pass the word around a little bit and feel free to post the URL to any other sites or boards: http://www.norcalprecision.com.

Of course now that Mike 'Undudeski' Miller has seen the new NCP site, I am getting 'ME TOO!' notes in the mail :-) I promise Mike - yours is going to be the next total site overhaul I do... (note how I did not say 'new construction' ;-) See ya this next weekend Mike... I'll update your site with the new goodies sometime after that...

Anyway folks have a look at the new Nor-Cal Precision site and let me know what you think.
 

Charles - (used to be aka JT) <tenarius@memorableplaces.com>
CCCPalifornia, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 00:05:52 (ZULU) (your host address: 158.252.197.58)

Cause I can't afford one of Jerry's rifles and when I see one it only makes me cry big Hoppe's #9 tears.

If he gets that 6.5x284 reamer I am going to contact the Devil himself and sell my soul for one.
 

Burlap eating Sniper Mutt for sale, Bolt out!
Bolt <reeldoctor@mindspring.com>
NC, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 00:27:05 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.50.55.142)

KEN?????

Now look, not ALL of the GREAT web gurus are named KEN! (Hmm dont know if I'd consider myself either great or a guru...)

Still in all Boltster, if Jery DOES get that reamer and you DO buy from him you will likely be a really happy camper. I have yet to meet ANYONE Jerry has dealt with who was not VERY pleased indeed.

Giggle.... Ken... sheesh!

Charles - NOT Ken (not that Ken's a bad dude at all :-) <tenarius@memorableplaces.com>
CCCPalifornia, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 00:34:25 (ZULU) (your host address: 158.252.197.58)

ImBareAssed Bolt, out!
Bolt <reeldoctor@mindspring.com>
NC, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 02:28:18 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.50.55.142)

I don't make barrels on Friday the 13th, friends.

Pat(mrbullet):

I am sold on the 6.5 x 284, believe me. I've been waitin' and waitin' for some finished specs, and a good reamer maker to come out with a chamber reamer. I should slap myself, I should have talked to Dave at Pacific LAST year to see how it was coming along. I could have waited on the 7-08 and have built a 6.5 x 284 for free!! Oh well. What else do I have to spend money on, eh?? I tell you one thing, when this rifle is complete, don't have a timeframe yet, hoping by the Varmint Hunters shoot at the latest, I'll bring it to Pierre and have you give it a once over. I'd let Shawn give it a workout at D&L if I can get my shit together by then, and if Janet doesn't go for building him one. I'm looking at making a long barrel pat, 28 to 30 inches, and I AM building it on a long action. I'll need to get a bolt, which we make, the 284 rim is smaller than the Win Mag, so I don't think that will be a problem. If I can catch the bolt early enough in the process, I may be able to put a different extractor, sako perhaps, in the bolt. Dirty secret, I don't like our extractors. If anyone will be in need of a Remington 700 magnum bolt with sako extractor I'll give it to ya, unless I decide to make a take down in the future. I tell you what, when I complete this project, there won't be a diamond I can't cut with the wooody I'm gonna have!!!!

By the way, I'm taking Gale Mcmillan's advice on the JB bore paste, we will probably void any warranty if this abrasive is used. Pat, if you want, I'll let you know how, in my twisted mind, to properly use this stuff. Stay away from the patches, very uneven, will take the edges off your lands. Use a lead cast, or lap, you'll save some years off your rifle.

Find a cleaning rod that you can unscrew at the orbital handle. Remove the jag and grind the end of the rod to a point. Wrap a flannel patch around the rod so it fits the bore about 3 inches from the point and push thru the bore from chamber end until you can just see the point when looking down the muzzle. Pour hot molten lead down the bore until filled, let cool for about 15-20 seconds, then push the cast out of the bore. Remove the patch from the rod, and file both ends of the cast(lap) until the lap will pass thru the bore with ease. Spread some of that JB's on the lap, and pull the lap thru the bore, muzzle to chamber. Clean barrel, check for fouling, if it needs more work, unscrew handle from rod, and pull another pass thru. This method should protect the sides and corners of the lands from wearing unevenly from cleaning, as the lap will follow the helix of the twist, and it would not be as harmful as a 'real' lap-job since you are not pushing and pulling the abrasive thru, which wears the lands at the ends of the barrel, and not nearly as harmful as FIRE LAPPING (MR Ben Siebert!!)

MikeM:

Tell us how you really feel about the replacement TS mag.... heheh... that's writers and publishers for you, I gotta deal with Jon Sundra in the shop now and then, the pedofile or whatever you call the wine drinkers LOL, and he writes well and is knowledgeable of what he does, but all of 'em are corrupt. Biased.

Benchrest shooters vs Tactical shooters:

No question Tactical shooters will buy more gear. Benchresters (no flame meant to any on this site) are the cheapest sob's out on the range. They basically want you to GIVE them barrels and components, they won't buy shit. Tony Boyer, acclaimed benchrester, uses Shilen barrels exclusively. Why? Probably because Shilen sponsors him and supplies him with all the barrels he needs. Tony could outshoot any of us on any day with any barrel, but he's cheap. It's a good racket, that benchrest club. Kind of why we've shyed away from the benchrest market. Snipers and tacticians pay. Plus they buy cooler shit than the Benchresters. NV and ghillies and such.
 

later

JR <jr_rcsd@hotmail.com>
rapid city, sd, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 03:12:05 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.34.14.24)

Seeking Testimonials:

I am actively looking for those of you who have bought a rifle from Jerry Rice at Nor-Cal Precision and who would be willing to type out a few words (or a great many for that matter) on his behalf.

If you are such a customer and would like to write a testimonial to be posted on the Nor-Cal site please contact me at: tenarius@memorableplaces.com I'd sure appreciate being able to add a section like this to his site. (Thanks to Mike Miller of Tactical Intervention Specialists who already has gotten onboard!)
 

Seeking Opinions:

What would you most like to see on a site devoted to new 1911 type handguns. Mail em to me. (guess my next project)
 

Seeking Bolt: (or somehting like that)

Gee Bolt, no worries!

I have rarely been confused with COMPETENT people so this is a nice change for me. I can think of a lot worse people than Ken to be confused with.
Charles Webmaster To The Stars... or sumthin... <tenarius@memorableplaces.com>
USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 04:00:30 (ZULU) (your host address: 158.252.197.198)

JT: on a 1911 site? I'll pass. Anything I say can and will be used against me in future bashing sessions.

On the good side, the 50 rounds I ran through the Sproingfeld 1911 yesterday, and the 50 today, both ran without a hiccup. Same ammo as before, same shooter, same mag, same EVERYTHING. The only difference was that now I've got right at half a case through it. Could it be that it just needed breaking in? According to Sproingfeld, the only thing they did was adjust the extractor, although the slide-to-frame fit was NOTICABLY different when I got it back. Different wear pattern on the rails also. I *THINK* it's a different slide, although it could have been "squeezed" and the rear sight restaked ('cause the rear sight stake mark is now different). Anyway, I'm working all weekend, so I'll run another 100 through it before Monday. Interesting stuff. If it's suddenly developed an apetite for truncated cones, it might be a keeper. I'm taking NO bets though.
Boomhauer (Bravo) <Bravo762@yahoo.com>
Arlen, Texas, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 04:42:06 (ZULU) (your host address: 209.180.85.244)

I just stumbled onto your duty roster recently, in response to pointers on other boards from pablito and mike brown. I've been to the other areas in SC before but figured the duty roster was just chin music. Was I ever wrong. Lots of worthwhile things being passed around.

hey pablito. I like your writing style. You don't manufacture, ah, reamers, now do you?

doug
doug <doug@intertrust.com>
USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 05:24:26 (ZULU) (your host address: 198.3.163.3)

Am I the only one here that thinks that TAR is an improvement over TS?

It's not that I would'nt mind a purely tactical publicaton of uniformly high quality, or that AR is perfect. Its just that I would rather have a more varied selection of rifle articles than a selection of BAD tactical articles, which is what TS had devolved into by the time it went KAPUT.
Also, the content of AR is (somewhat) more fully reflective of the full breadth of my interests. It aint all about tactical work in my book, and I feel that we would all do well to pay attention to other shooting communities, if for no other reason than the fact that we draw upon both product lines and ideas that are not indigenous to the tatcial community. I see the benchrest crowd as being our "pure research" division, where the eggheads of the game push the envelope. Same thing with the highpower, hunting, Palma, all those other guys. I like some of the old varmint hunting stuff, even though there are no varmints to speak of to shoot at in my part of the world. This is the history of the present state of the art, and thus I feel it to be inherantly interesting.
Tom Simpson <bullet@sc.rr.com>
Colatown, SC, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 06:07:07 (ZULU) (your host address: 24.88.84.155)

Two things, first is that Speer publishes a load in their reloading manual for 50grn bullets using H322 that in my opinion seems just a bit too hot, even their published starting load(24.0grns) seems pretty warm and their maximum load of 26.0grns I wouldn't dare try to approach after seeing what my starting loads were running through my gasguns and the loads Speer is stating were supposedly developed using IMI brass. Seems to me that Speer is usually kinda conservative with their loads that they publish but this one load doesn't seem to follow that pattern, looking into the Hogdon reference manual would seem to confirm that Speer is a bit on the high side this time.

Second, shooting for 500 yards on ground squirrel is a real pain in the butt, I needs just a slightly bigger target(prarrie dog perhaps) so that at my current skill level I can start making hits(or get better, I know, I intend to). There was a slight breeze and those doofy little commie rats weren't behaving very nicely, they wouldn't be a good varmint and stand close enough to the 500 yard steel plates so that I could use the exact same elevation or comeups on them as I used for the steel. I gave several squirrels a darned good edumacation when I planted the bullet right underneath their furry bellies or kicked dirt in their face, I really made some of those things leap in the air! Shooting on the steel right at 500 yards I was spot on the money with no problems(needed about 10MOA from a 100yd zero) but once I got off the steel and the range began to vary a bit(they always seemed to be 20-40 yards in front or 20-40 yards behind the steel plate range), all the little differences were just enough so that I was unluckily missing instead of luckily hitting. Still though I wasn't missing by much, not much at all. At that range those little suckers are definitely subMOA with one respect or another depending on if they are standing or crawling. Often times the scope just needed another click or two so that the round would have gone right through the little vermin, my ability to hold the rifle accurately so that I shoot small groups is not the problem, it's matching the scope to the range so that it is within the vitals of that subMOA vermin. My skills on the scope were often good enough to get me within a mere fraction of an inch while at other times I'd blow it and the scope would be off by 3-4 inches, they just needed to be BETTER! Frustrating little things they are!

I'm gonna have to start dropping some trail mix around the steel plates out there so that when I get back to my rifle all the squirrels will be playing "ring around the rosie" right by the steel!

Finally to work out some of the built up frustration I turned my efforts to the closer ranged squirrels, I bagged about 8 of the things at ranges from 260-350 yards. Might have just barely winged one at 400 yards but it was too hard to tell, the squirrel slowly slid down into some deep grass where he either crawled into a hole to never come out again while we were there or he died on the back side of the grass never to crawl out again, I couldn't walk out to confirm it though.

Still loving this not so little mousegun/gasgun "squirrel rifle from hell", now I just gotta clean the silly thing and take care of my sunburns.
 

B. Douglas <uglygun@lightspeed.net>
Sunburned Redneck Popping Squirrels in, Cowpie, Commiefornia, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 07:40:43 (ZULU) (your host address: 66.27.232.201)

Interesting posts, of late, on the 6.5 X .284. Let me take them in order:

6.5 x 08 Improved vs 6.5 X 284. Which to pick. Seems some folks out there have to re-invent the wheel. Not a cheap shot, just an observation from a grouchy old fart.

First, improving the '08 case will get you about halfway to the powder charge the 6.5 x .284 version will hold. Remember, you have '06 case capacity here. Not so with the '08. I'd like to run some side by side tests. No one mentioned the AOL of the loads or anything about that type of comparison. Just that they were getting "6.5 x .284" ballistics. To many variables here to make solid comparisons.

I stump for the 6.5 X .284 for the reason I picked it. It's factory supported (Black Hills Ammunition) and Norma is making the brass. Sure, it's spendy, but do you really want to fire form your brass for a tactical rifle? Sorry, I want the availability of FACTORY NEW ammunition. Of course there is the possible litigation issues facing use of reloads for tactical operations. Anyone out there shooting handloads? Thought not.

Undudeski, you may want to comment on that last. Though it should go without saying...

JR...don't sell your soul for a mere reamer or rifle. Pick the 6.5 X .284 and drive on...I doubt you'll be looking back. If you are, it's only to check on the competiion...;-)
By the way, "they" look great in the review mirror!

I've gone on record as saying I'm not a fan of the big magnums. The 6.5 x .284 will do everything it's bigger brethren will do with less muss and fuss.

There are really only two other cartridges to consider, IMHO. The .308 (of course) and the .300 Winchester Magnum. Both are developed, have a variety of rounds available, and are factory supported.

That having been said my second choice to the 6.5 x .284 was the 7 x 61MM Sharpe and Hart!

All for now...what am I doing up so late posting you guys?

As Bolt said; Quiet...

Semper Fi,

Wes
Wes Howe <wsaa@proaxis.com>
Blodgett, OR, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 07:53:44 (ZULU) (your host address: 198.145.248.69)

Two Shoes...
I'm with you. Winchester is the BEST domestic brass! Lapua is the best brass.

doug...
Nope... after three divorces, I've been reamed enough :((

You secret 50BMG loaders out there (and you know who you are ;), I've been raggin forster about a power case trimmer for a few weeks, and just got a prototype based on their power trimmer for "little boolets".. looks good, smells good, must be good... will be about $60/$70... one fifth the price of the Gracey. They say it'll be out in about 4 months. Shoud be able to do 300 to 400 cases an hour.

Tom Simpson...
No, you're not. I agree. I'd rather a good long rifle magazine, than a piss poor tactical magazine. TAR is better... better than PS even. They publish some PS articles with a shovel.

Ugly (gun ;)...
26 gr of H322 is OK in one of my guns, not OK in another... the max load will vary depending on the particular riffle... that's why they tell you to start 10-15% low, work up, and look for the usual suspects.

Nom de' Plume (aka Wes)...
>"Anyone out there shooting handloads? Thought not."<

HA!... But you'd be amazed at the number of guys out there, shooting "Mexican Match" ;)

'lito
 

Pablito <condor@mags.net>
USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 10:49:31 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.134)

I ain't no great web guru either. I keep the underlying stuff running. On our end, Sandy's the one that does the web magic.
 

Ken Hunter <hunterkr@riflemen.net>
Nokesville, Va, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 12:40:41 (ZULU) (your host address: 207.233.164.10)

CDC' <criscurt@isu.edu>
USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 16:12:04 (ZULU) (your host address: 134.50.253.13)

Go longer than that and the target will be gone or conditions will change. That is real world, not the varible math world. Enough on this.

Tom, you like the new magazine better. Great. The problems with the old magazine are simple, Managing. Most of the guys that wrote for TS were not experts at writting. Hell I started by accident and will never think of myself as someone published. Spent too much time playing football and not enough time in class for that. Many guys were like me but I found the real problem the articles from the ones that wrote every month about nothing of tactical value. The magazine could have been a tactical magazine but they tried to do it all. You want a magazine that gives you pretty pages of multi purose go with Guns and Ammo. I doubt TAR will dethrone GxA. By the way my dad called multipurpose "Good for nothing" I tend to agree.

On sniper calibers. It has to be available over the counter without fire forming other other tricks to work.

Enough of my crap do what you want.
Mike Miller <tactical@tacticalintervention.com>
Calif, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 17:19:51 (ZULU) (your host address: 152.163.213.78)

Went back & forth with a Peter Jones (pj@camouflage.com) on the Tenebrex ARD's. He claims that if you don't like the image with the thin ARD they make for Leupold, you won't like the image with any of their products. Also asked under what conditions the problem occurred. Send them your info guys!

Wonder if this is a case of clueless dude in customer service or a truly honest company that's saying everything they make is a POS?
 

WR Moore <wrmoore2001@yahoo.com>
VA, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 18:06:31 (ZULU) (your host address: 63.21.139.207)

Would you accept something in between???
How about getting the straight skinny on a product that works the way it's supposed to, but comes at a price, and you're getting "The truth about the price"! They are NOT a POS!

The big ARD's WORK for the M22s with the pink anti-laser filters, and the MK4's with the same pink anti-laser filters... these filters NEED ARDs... or they advertise "Shoot the dummy with the rank to have M22s, or the sniper, "right now"!... and for that, they are worth the price in image quality.

If you want them for stalkin', don't waste your money... they won't help, you need better camo than that.

'lito
 

Pablito <condor@mags.net>
USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 18:44:20 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.80)

I was just looking over my old TS articles the other day. I came across a Norm and Rocky Chandler article about trigger guards.

The Chandler's are saying, in a nut shell, get rid of the 2oz Remington trigger guard, get one of theirs or one like it that is built for the field (the Chandler's trigger guard is 8.4 ounces).

My question to all on this site, and those especially who have worked in this military occupation, have you ever had a trigger guard brake or get damaged? If so, then to what degree and how so? Do you think that the article is accurate or fair in what it says?

I spoke to Jerry about this too. His comment in general was that he never saw a trigger guard that broke before.

Another note about the trigger guard, they are saying that the Remington trigger guard is built poorly due to the fact that the base can be release due to the overly exposed release mechanism. Any feed back, opinion would be appreciated.

The article from TS is August 2000, starting page is 44.

One other thing, I found something of interest about a sniper rifle weight from the above article. On page 45, third column, fourth line from the bottom, "Until it reaches eighteen pounds -- a sniper rifle is not overly heavy, and we should not sacrifice accuracy or durability for a comfortable carry."

Hmmm, not to stir up the M40A3 debate again, what do you think?

Curious George out...

Darren...
Semper Fi
Darren <ddong@usmc.net>
San Francisco, CA, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 21:31:10 (ZULU) (your host address: 64.24.217.195)

For myself I would like to see something on A)Starting up/What rifle/scope combo. Call it a beginners set. Then what next ? I mean what is the price break between a Chandler and a Pac-Nor ? B)Scopes Same thing...start w/Leuppy Vari-X III Tac and next thing ya know it's a "U-Still-Owe", snicker...come on, isn't there an intermediate scope out there and if so what/why ? C) Barrels... pro's & con's of who & why.Like, is a 5R better than a Blackstar? Last but not least (at least for me) Insertion, CCM (cross-country movement) and land navigation devices. I know, GPS but what if you don't have one ? What is the current "Best" compass out there ?

I really have appreciated the posts about the 155s and the IMI brass. Now I know where I went wrong...almost. Back to the loading room to try it again.

Out Here !!
Will <Rogue308@mindspring.com>
Sweet Home, AL, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 22:35:12 (ZULU) (your host address: 165.121.231.15)

6.5x284 guys........I think that the 'fag mag' is truly a fine development, but I'd like to stick my .02 into the fray, and toss in my sense of reality. OK - the .260 is a bit light in the boiler room for real long-range shooting, and like Mike M. says - nobody wants to fireform all of their brass, so the .260 IMP is OUT. As long as I can't get decent domestic brass (fully formed) for the 6.5x284, I'll never consider investing in that wildcat. Norma brass? Some of you old farts (like me) remember the problem with Norma, and their revolving US distributors. Do you really want to join the 'mail-order-of-the-month' club? Black Hills Ammo is the only thing that this cartridge has going for it at this time, and although they make a very high-quality product, they can't support it alone. It takes real mass-merchandising, the kind that they're not able to do right now. Which brings me to my prediction. Don't ask Winchester to legitimize the 6.5x284, because they have a new case waiting in the wings - the parent is the .300WSM! Before a few of you say "Oh no - a mangleum" or "Magnumitis" just forget that dirty word for a moment. Have any of you SEEN this new cartridge yet? If yer singin' the praises of the .284 case ya better take a good lool at this one. Rumor (from the USRAC rep.) says that they'll necking up and down in the near future. A .264WSM? And no funny sounds from you guys, either! The .264Win Mag is a fine cartridge, if you understand it, and use it for its intended purposes, right 'lito? It's just suffered from ignorant users and bullshit 'gunwriters' in the past. One more thing before I quit this rant - the .338RUM will eventually bury the .338 Lupua, at least in the USA, and for much of the above reasons (and I'm no big fan of Remington). And Boomhauer - not ALL Springfields are junk.
ALAN <asimon@gj.net>
PALISADE, COLORADO, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 22:38:29 (ZULU) (your host address: 216.169.65.197)

in Gale's simple yet eloquent explanation on JB bore paste:

'Picture a patch riding along the barrel with abrasive on it. It is removing material at a given rate. It comes to a place where there is copper fouling and it rides over it cutting the same amount that it was cutting before it came to the copper. You continue until all the fouling is gone and what have you done? You have put the same contour in the barrel steel that was in it when it was metal fouled'

Don't kid yourself guys, if you are using an abrasive in the bore it is removing metal. Which includes bore and leade. The match barrelmakers go to great extremes to provide the bore with a finish that is polished and clean. Using JB will destroy the finish left by the barrelmaker. Copper remover (foul out) and a brass brush is my recommendation.

'nuff said
 

JR <jr_rcsd@hotmail.com>
rapid city, sd, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 22:40:56 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.34.14.24)

Several folks have asked me the difference between the three, if any.
Frankly, and embarassingly, I don't have a drawing of the .260 Remington.

First, there are minor differences between the spec. for the .308 and the 7.62 X 51MM(NATO). For our purposes let's consider them identical.

The difference in between the .308 and the 6.5/08 is not over all length or length to the base of the shoulder. They are identical in those dimensions. Both sport a 20 degree shoulder, as well.
The difference is the length of the shoulder and neck.

The .308 is 1.5598" to the base of the shoulder, as is the 6.5/08.

However, shoulder to the base of neck dimension is .2143" for the 6.5/08 and a shorter .1518" for the .308. Conversely, the neck length for the 6.5/08 is a short .2409" and the .308 is .3034".

Does this make a difference? Depends on which school of thought (long vs. short necks) you belong to...

Anyone out there with a .260 Remington drawing that can compare the 6.5 dimensions to the .260 and let us know if we have lost our minds and there is a difference?

Personally, why mess with the difference, IF ANY, when you can have the 6.5 X .284...;-)

Semper Fi,

Wes
Wes Howe <wsaa@proaxis.com>
Blodgett, OR, USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 23:11:08 (ZULU) (your host address: 198.145.248.146)

http://www.snipercountry.com/Intro/intro.htm

Alan...
Yup... I had a .264, and loved it. But, like you said, the gun rag writers killed it by recomending that it be used for everything from Prairie Dogs to African plains game. Too Bad, good cartridge.

'lito
Pablito <condor@mags.net>
USA - Saturday, April 14, 2001 at 23:48:16 (ZULU) (your host address: 208.249.180.90)

• Back to Archives