I've finally saved up the cash to purchase a rail system, and after a lot or research, and finger F'n at the local gunshops, I've narrowed my choice to two systems. Either a Knight's RAS, or the RAS II. My setup is a 14.5 inch 1/7 bushy with an ACOG TA31 and ARMS 40 BUIS.

I'm not really fond of the "hump" on the RAS II, and am wondering what benefits I am getting with a free-floated carbine. I have no intention of mounting optics on the RAS, I'm looking at adding a surefire and TangoDown vertical grip.

The primary application of the rifle will be 0-300 yards, but I wouldn't mind being able to hit out to 600 with it as well, especially with the TA-31. Will the RAS II greatly increase the rifle's performance at the longer yards, and will it have any impact in the 0-300 range? Thanks for the help.

M4Fanatic

Free floating the barrel will no doubt help accuracy. How much though, depends on a lot of factors. Is it a must have on a carbine? Must have, no. Nice to have, yes.
You could go with a free float M4 RAS.

I shot a FF 16" carbine yesterday and I couldn't see any benefit as far as accuracy goes.  The groups I shot with the FF looked similar to the groups I shot with my non-FF M4.
I highly doubt a FF would make me any more accurate...sure my gun may have the potential to be but there is no hope for my horrible shooting ability [:D]

If/when I build my next rifle I may go FF just for the coolness factor and to keep up with the Jones's but I would not go to the trouble of converting my current rifles.

Just my 2 cents.

i don't mean to rain on your parade, but 600 yards with a 14.5" barrel?
really?

I have a 16" Bushy that was free-floated. Groups shrank about 0.5" at 100yds (from 1.5-2" to 1-1.5") immediately after the switch to free float and remained consistent.

However, that is from a bench and sitting. Unless you are in a pretty stable position to begin with, I doubt you'll be able to appreciate the extra advantage provided by a free float tube.

My .02......
Consider upgrading the trigger to one of the many that are offered such as JP, RR 2 stage, Armalite, etc. Your Accuracy will go way up.
After the trigger I'd FF the BBL using a set up like the Oly tube or the one that Stokes is offering. While not as sexy as a RAS II they're a hell of a lot cheaper (not mention a hell of a lot lighter)

What this will accomplish is removing some of the variables such as bbl pressure and also offer consistent harmonics. Try this....Go prone at 100m and shoot a 10 round group usng the mag as a rest. Then shoot another 10 round group while placing the fore end (non FF) on a sand bag or something. You'll notice about a 6-8" rise in the group. The group should still be tight but just higher.

While this is no big deal (as you can compensate by dialing in your sights)it does present a problem when you shoot from other positions as the it's very difficult to apply consistent bbl pressure.

Long story short is, if dinging 12" circles at 3-400 is your goal, my advice is a good trigger, FF that puppy and consider a harris bipod.
Of course ammo will also play a key role but that's another issue....

BTW, I'm presently using a RAS but that's only because I had one laying around. Sooner or later I'll FF my CAR with an Oly tube.

My barrel cools quicker with the FF RAS.

Why would being able to hit a silhouette target at 600 seem unusual for a 14.5" barrel?  Seems pretty simple and straight forward to me.

The RAS has a heat shield to direct heat back at the barrel.  Some people have issues with the lower panel rattling with the RAS.  My FF RAS equiped rifle can do a consistant 1MOA.  I have an after market trigger and ACOG on that rifle too though.

coltcarbine,

I don't pretend to have the knowlegde that many on this board do have, but the TA01NSN was designed for short barreled ARs. Like the 16 and 14.5 inch barrels. And if the folks at Trijicon know what they're doing, then why did they put that 800 yard bullet drop compensator on it if its not feasable? Someone must think its possible. I'm not saying I'm going to be lobbing shots all day long, but I do like the thought of having half a chance at hitting something at the range. I'm not trying to be a smart ass, I'm just trying to figure out if FF is worth the extra cost.

Thanks PDM, I'm starting to think I'll go with the RASII. Whats your opinion on the two stage triggers? I was looking at the RRA or the Bushy.

Hawkeye, I really like the look of the FF RAS, but I'm not excited to pay the money to have them remove my permanently attached phantom, then pay to replace it, as its my understanding that they will most likely ruin it in the removal process. Plus, I don't like being away from my baby that long. ;)

Thanks for all the replies, this board is great for hammering out my thoughts. Always helpful feedback.

I'd say if you are going to attach and detach stuff often (like flash lights and vertical grips) and you are also concerned about your barrel getting very hot then FF system is a necessity.

However, if you don't use any competition parts and shoot in prone and/or any off-hand positions like me, you won't notice the difference in accuracy. Its just that there will be no PoI shift when you attach and detach stuff.

I think these cooling systems are more necessary for carbines since they generally heat up faster than rifles do.

If you've every fired a SAW you will realize the long range potential of the 5.56 round, hitting targets at 800-100meters is not impossible. (800M is easy, 1000?, well it requires a longer burst.)  

That's the beauty of the AR if at first you don't hit the target, pull the trigger again. That simple. 600M with an ACOG should be a piece of cake. 1-2 rounds per hit tops.

[b]As for FF tube, I think it makes a bigger difference with heavier barrels, but I'ld FF anything as a rule, on Ar-15's it seems to have a dramatic effect more often than not.[/b]

Bartholomew_Roberts, you just installed a FF handguard an dropped your MOA 1/2?[>:/]
 

When I FF my 16" Medium weight barrel I did not see much improvment in the rifles inherent accuracy.  However, my point of impact does not shift when I sling up then shoot off a bipod then move to a sand bag and then shoot off hand and then put on my Corsak IR laser etc etc.  Whithout the barrel free floated every change I make would have an effect on my point of ipmact.

M4, as for triggers I guess it depends on how you plan on shooting.....

For tack driving it's hard to beat a Jewell. They're a little tricky to adjust but once they're dialed in it's like breaking glass.

If a little heavier two stage is desired then I'd recommend the Armalite. The RR is also nice.

For "up drill" type stuff (rapid pairs) then I'd go with the JP single stage. It's too easy to catch the sear disconnect on the two stage and fail to properly reset the trigger, thereby causing you to look like a dork trying to milk a round out of the gun (I speak from experience!).

Actually you can get a pretty decent single stage with a JP spring kit (about 10$) and grinding away about 1/2 of the rear of the hammer. Polish the park off of the pins and the sides of the hammer. Not perfect but usable.

Hope this helps.
Paul

IMHO, consider the following:

- The FF RASII is only about $30 more than the standard RAS -- I personally don't think it makes any sense to spend $300 on a non-FF rail system.

- Vertical forward grips leverage any rearward pressure into the RAS, transferring that pressure to the barrel.  If you were [i]not[/i] planning on using a vertical grip, I'd be more inclined to say skip the FF and go with a $30 add-on rail system.

- Wait a bit to see what the new SureFire rail system looks like.  Apparently it's suppose to be around $200.  Some have even claimed that it's a FF system....

FWIW, I have the RASII and purchased it after considerable research.  It's lightweight and looks great.  Once you mount an optic (either an M2 on the bridge or an ACOG in front of it) you won't notice it as much.

If you're planning on shelling out $300 for the RAS, then I'd definitely recommend the RASII.  Otherwise you might want to wait and see what SureFire has up it's sleeve.

Corey

EDITED to add:  I've learned here that the toughest aftermarket trigger for the AR15 is the Accuracy Speaks single stage unit.  A friend purchased one and I have to say it is incredible.  On a working rifle I wouldn't even think about another trigger.

Good luck and let us know what you decide to get!

Yes, really. Should be no problem for a shooter who knows what they are doing.

I would get the RAS II over the standard RAS any day. With the ACOG installed, you wont even notice the bridge, not at all. It will just blend right in. I have a RAS II with ACOG mounted and it looks, feels, and shootse very natural.

If the bridge bothers you too much, will your set up allow a FF RAS? Just so long as you do not have a permanently attached muzzle device, you should be able to install it fine. It is another GREAT system.

FF is not a requirement, but if you are upgrading the way you are, it is a wise investment and a worthwhile addition.

[img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid61/p876adfa41550044e19325b8c63078ab3/fc32753c.jpg[/img]
The rifle is set up a little different now, but this shows how the ACOG/RAS II sort of blend together.

I dont believe its [b]necessary[/b] on anything but a precision rig.  But it certainly doesnt hurt anything.  

I keep a pretty good log of my shooting. I shot the rifle almost every weekend from August through September.

With this configuration (16" Bushy HBAR, stock trigger, Enhanced telestock, Colt M4 handguards, TA11 ACOG, SB SS109 Lot 6 1993), my groups were consistently 1.5"-2". I'd occasionally get some really outstanding groups. I had one 4-shot group that was all in a quarter-inch square at 100yds before the last shot opened it to 1.5"; but that was more of a freak occurence than an example of skill. Never had a sub-MOA group.

I'd have to look at my log to see exactly when I free-floated with the FF-RAS (sometime in September); but the first time I went out to verify my sights after the work, 5-shot groups dropped into the 1"-1.5" range and stayed there plus two sub-MOA 5-shot groups (same configuration as above but with Magpul M93 stock and carbine FF-RAS).

I only had one bench shooting session with the Magpul M93 and no FF-RAS and I averaged about 1.5" that day - so tough to say how much the improved cheek weld may be an issue. What I can say is since installing the FF-RAS the majority of my 5-shot groups are 1.5" and under.

It is my opinion, the FF-RAS definitely enhanced my shooting from the bench and contributed most of that improvement. Whether that is from free-floating or the much improved barrel cooling compared to the M4 handguards, I can't say though I imagine it is a bit of both.

Being able to hit a target, and hitting a target consistantly are two different things. Sure, a shooter can hit a target at 600 yards with .223, I never said that couldn't be done. But the shorter the barrel, the harder it is to accomplish. We are talking a carbine here, not a long HB rifle. Accuracy out of a short barrel like that is going to really start to go down hill after 100 yards. Believe me, I shoot a Bushy with a 11.5" bbl very often.




Point taken. However, putting a TA01NSN on a carbine will not make IT shoot 800 yards accurately. What makes accuracy?
1.The shooter, with lots of practice.
2.Great ammo.
3.A rifle set up to shoot accurately. (example, a HBAR, freefloat, 20" bbl. set up).  

You can not take a Chevy Chevette, put a Holley 4 barrel carb on it and expect to to run like a Corvette. It just wasn't made to perform the same way.
Same as AR's. There's carbines, and then there's rifles.



For a shooter who shoots a lot, I'm sure it isn't a problem to hit a target at that range, but to consistantly hit it, I would have to see it with my own eyes. See Chevy analolgy above.
I have yet to see anyone say that THEY shoot 600+ yards with a 14" barrel.
Keep in mind, my point is I'm not saying it can't be done. I'm saying that it can't be done consistantly with a 14" barrel, and putting any optic on a carbine will not compensate for short barrel length and magically make the rifle shoot better.

Shooters that shoot, chime in here.

I've never needed it, and I shoot with a forward grip (I've been using an M33 lower handguard).

I don't like the additional weight foward of the receiver - the accuracy enhancement is nice, but I dont' see it as 'needed' for me.

Realistically over 200m shots are not likely for me so I don't really need the free float.

Now if they could just make a SIR in the 4oz or less range then I'd consider it [;)].

Then it's become apparent to me that I really don't know what I'm doing.  I was shooting dingers SPR built by Wes with a [s]10x[/s] 4.5x and 62grain IMI ammo at 200 yards.  I was on target and shoot 3 decent (in my opinion) groups but that was at 1/3 the distance you guys are talking about and using a scope with [s]over twice[/s] roughly the same magnification.  I'm not trying to be a smart-ass here but I really don't know how you guys do it.  Maybe I need to take a class or something.

Which literature is that?  Both my -10 & -23&P list the M4's max effective range (point target) at 500M (around 550 yards).  I know I've hit man sized targets at that range.

Just ask the Marines who use M4s if they can hit 500M targets with it...

From what I have read, the major reason for a FF tube on a Carbine is not shrinking groups, but preventing the zero from shifting as gear is added, removed, and shifted around on the rails.  A FF tube on a DCM gun keeps the zero from shifting as the sling pressure varies between shooter postures.  I'd agree that the FF is a low-cost but important feature on the rail systems you are looking at.  I wouldn't buy an non-FF tube for $300.

Hitting the whole silloutte at 600m is not sub-MOA work.  I don't know the exact measurement, but a B-27 should be 20-24" shoulder-to-shoulder.  That's ~3-4 MOA.  If I'm shooting a scoped rifle and I can't keep most rounds inside 4 MOA, that's a bad day on the range.

Coltcarbine:
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=174335
is discussing shooting at 600m.  

I've done ~2" at 200 yards, so now I want to try this.  :)

I'll call MSTN and get the price for the upper and glass.  I'll need donations to fund the experiment. ;)

Just for fun, we once opened up on a 200 yard B-27 with a iron-sighted 870 and hit it with 5 out of 7 slugs, once we bracketed the range.  (We almost needed a downrange forward observer :) ) But no one is zeroing their slug gun at 200.

I think some people need to reminded that the question was about 14.5" M4's at 600 yards. Not their scoped 20" HBAR. My question was about it being infered an "easy shot".

blikbok - Your post has cleared up a lot of questions for me.  For some reason I was picturing quarter sized groups at 600 yards.  I have a better understanding of what everyone is talking about now.  Thank you! [beer]

No!

Va_Dinger:

There is no accuracy or precision difference between a 20" HBAR and a 14.5 or 16" carbine.  I can't testify about the 14.5, but I can testify that an un-FF 16" can shoot < 2 MOA consistently.  And I thought we *were* talking about a scoped carbine?

Simple answer, no, it's not an easy shot.  Nothing around an MOA is "easy".  The basics of marksmanship are vital.  The semi-auto makes repeatabilty simpler, since the shooter doesn't have to break position between shots.

Va_dinger:
No, I'm not joking.

If the rifles and carbines in question are scoped, there is no difference in precision.  If the diameter is the same, shorter barrels are stiffer than longer ones.  Competetive shooters, both rimfire and centerfire, have been aware of this for a while.

Theoretically, a 16" HBAR, freefloated, should be *more* precise (smaller groups) than a FF 20" HBAR, but I doubt I'm a good enough shooter to prove this myself.

Second, the practice:
http://www.jobrelatedstuff.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=174335

The can speak for themselves, but I recall New-ARguy has shot sub-MOA with a FF 14.5 carbine.  I also belive KevinB has much experience shooting 300+m with a carbine as well.  

I have shot 20" and 16" AR's, both stock, un-freefloated and scoped.  I can tell no difference in precision between the two.  ~1.5 MOA with good BTHP ammo.

my main motivation for free floating is to have a rock solid mount for the paq4a and the pistol grip and the occational flash light. other than that they just add weight.
[img]http://www.hunt101.com/img/069465.jpg[/img]

The way the theory goes, accuracy is not effected by barrel length, merely the velocity. So... in theory, the size of the groups between a 20" barrel and a 14.5" barrel should not be much different at all should all other things be equal. Less velocity will equal more drop, merely making groups lower on the target, not larger. In fact, some argue that the shorter barrel will produce greater accuracy because of less barrel whip?

My experience is somewhat limited with this, but what experience I do have backs this up. This is all presuming the use of optics. The longer sight radius of the longer barrel will do lots to imprive accuracy on a standard rifle vs the carbine. But remove the iron sights and use optics, and you should not be getting larger groups with shorter barrels, just more bullet drop.

I have shot submoa out to 300 yards every time I have tried. Granted it was just hardly sub moa, but it was sub moa. At BRC last year I shot the same rifle at the 450 yard range and from prone was able to hit the 1'x1' center of the steel target everytime. I kept moving up from prone until I was shooting off hand, still hitting the 4'x4' steel target nearly every time. Pleanty of people from the boards were there to see this. I believe I also have some video footage of this.

That was with SA battle pack ammo, a 14.5" chrome lined 1/9 Bushmaster barrel. The rest of the gun is pretty tricked with a SP trigger, TA31 ACOG, SIR system, Vortex FS (supposed to increase accuracy).

I have not had the opportunity to shoot past 450 yards. The one range I go to is just opening up a 600 yard range. As soon as I get the chance I will get back there. If the 600 yard range is open, I will try my luck at that range with that gun and see what happens. Based on what I have done before, and what I know others to have done, I am confident that hitting a man size target at 600 yards will not be terribly problematic. It may take me a second to see where I am hitting at that range with my ammo and reticle, but once I get it dialed in, I am confidient the gun will do the job.

A LONGER (BETWEEN IRON SIGHT DISTANCE) IS ALSO A MAJOR DETERMINING FACTOR, AS THE SHOOTER GETS MORE ALIGNMENT CONTROL, THEREFORE, LONGER IS BETTER IN THIS AREA TOO :)
JACK

A properly stabilized bullet is a properly stabilized bullet. The bullet does not care if it was launched from a 2" or 22" Brl.


Free-floating a Brl can help.  Adding a heavy & bulky RAS type system may make sense if you have a ton of accesories you just must hang off your rifle, but for most people it's a waste.

Whats the longest you have ever held someone at gunpoint?  For me it's been 20 mins or more, and more than once. With all the crap typically attached to a RAS, can you maintain a good shooting stance, training the rifle on target, without any shaking as fatigue sets in?  I can with a light carbine, but I couldnt with many of the rifles i see pictured here.

GEE, I wonder if a 2" sight base will out shoot a longer one like on rifles aposed to snub nosed pistols, that would be someting to see, espec at 300 meters. I wonder why no one ever realized that in all the rifles ever made. Controling where the accurate bullet goes is at the top of things to try and accomplish, but I'm always ready to see something new.
Jack

Jack, we've been talking about scoped guns. Granted, a longer sight radius is going to be much more accurate than a shorter one, but remove irons from the picture and use optics, all things should be about equal 'cept the velocity and bullet drop... no?

I'm pointing out that there are dif ways to figure out if a longer barrel compaired to a short one, will affect accuracy. Take a rifle length weapon with the (everything identical except barrel lengths) irons and optics, compaired to a carbine set up the exact same way, ammo, shooters, same day, etc. I say  longer barrel vs. short (both known as accurate barrels)will give more accuracy than a carbine length, no matter how you decide to (aim) them, because of various things to include the human factor such as shaking, the longer barrel has a positive effect in controling the accuracy results. Bullet wt., Bullet type, velocity, powder, rifling type, etc., are dif. (obviously) than human factors, but the human eliment is one thing being forgotten here, but all still have to work together.  Since a free float is normaly more accurate since no varing external pressures are a factor in disrupting the barrel harmonic's, I also believe a few extra inches length gives the bullet a little more consistant stability, tighter groups, fewer flyers. That combined with the human factors being considered into the barrel length considerations, will show an edge to the longer barrel. Another way to see what can be done with long vs short barrels, set up a fixture with no human factor involved, then do the human factor equasion with the same weapons, and then compare those results.    
Now there is a test someone can do:)
Good shootin, Jack

I'm all for an empirical test of the iron sight issue for the record.

We need a pictorial AR-15 FAQ:
What is a ____?
Is a 20" more accurate than a 16?
Phantom vs. Vortex?
Free-float or not?

Just FYI, but Colt M4 handguards weigh 6.7oz and use the 2.5oz factory barrel nut for a total of 9.2oz.

A Carbine length FF-RAS (7.2oz) with barrel nut (4.2oz) weighs 11.4oz without panels, 14.1oz with 3 11-rib panels.

So you are talking an increased weight of between 2.2oz and 4.9oz.

[url=http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=172238&w=myTopicPop]Rail System and Accesory Weights[/url]

Jack is confusing a rifles inherent mechanical accuracy with the shooters abilities. A common misconception, usually limited to novices who believe buying a scope or getting a trigger job will "make their rifle more accurate."

Ergonomic issues like sight plain and trigger pull may help the shooter shot better, but they dont make the rifle more accurate.

Okay, take a 4oz weight hold it in your left hand, with arm stretch out infront of your body, and get back to me in 20 mins.

BTW: I use standards carbine handguards. My Rifles are semi auto, I have no need for double head shields.

Well I guess if that extra 4oz is a deal-breaker for you, you should stick with the standard carbine handguards.

My 1911 weighs [b]38oz UNLOADED.[/b]

But then again, Im a he-man.

[:|]

A RAS system attaches to the barrel, so that is a factor that will not help accuracy, not because of the added wt., but the fact that annything you touch, pull, or press on in an inconsistant manor, that is also attached to a barrel, will adversly affect the accuracy.
Those who may think the human factor are not important, are choosing to ignor history. Just look at the equipment that the competition money pro's use, plus what the Olympic shooters use to get the accuracy sqeezed out of thier competition weapons, to include counter wts. and long barrels. Mechanic's of barrel lengths without human factors statement is also interesting, since someone here states that a 2" barrel will shoot as well as a 22" barrel. I wish someone would demo that to me and everyone here, that would be the barrel to put under a preditor. LOL
Jack  

While I have agreed with you for the most part, I cant say I agree with this. Or at least not why this was said. While I myself have not had a problem shooting accurately with carbines with barrels as small as 14.5", what Jack says makes sense.

IMHO, it does not matter in the slightest how inherantly accurate a gun is. If a shooter can not acheive that accuracy, it is wasted. A gun can only be as accurate as the shooter can make it. A gun capable of 1/4 moa that has a 18lb trigger pull, is not a 1/4 moa gun if no one can shoot 1/4 moa with it.

If someone feels the shorter guns are harder to shoot and acheive better accuracy with, then that is certainly worthy of mention. I myself have not noticed a great difference, but I have very limited experience.

Either way, we're not talking submoa or any such precision shooting. We're talking about hitting a man sized target at 600 with a carbine. It can be done, it is done most everyday.

I call [i]bullshit[/i] on that one. Prove it. I assume you are one of those guys who don't shoot 300 plus yards as I've stated in my previous post.

Shoot 600 yards, then come back and talk about it, especially with a carbine.

Damn, kids.

Actually Newarguy shot a sub MOA 3 shot group at 300 with his 14.5" barrel and posted pics.  He used one sand bag (could have as easily used a pack) and did it with the cheapo 52 grain Walmart Winchester from the prone position.  Weather permitting I will see how well my upper does at 300 this weekend.  It has already done sub MOA at 100.  I let another female forum member who is not an experienced shooter shoot the M4 and although there were flyers all over the paper she got fully half of the shots in a 2 MOA group in the bullseye at 300.  Oh yes its also a 14.5" barrel.  So MOST of the rounds on a 600m silhouette is not out of the question at all.

I have already stated I have not shot out to 600, and said that it is done most every day, not that I do it most every day. But I have stated how I have shot at 300 and 450, and how impressed I was at the results at those distances. If you would actually read whats being said here you would have read that.

However, there was just another thread discussing a similar subject where more than one member discussed their experiences shooting at these longer ranges with their carbines. I will have to find which post it was and post a link if I can.

If you dont already know, please remember I am not talking about a stock, off the shelf, out of the box carbine. I am talking about a rifle that has a FF rail system, an ACOG, a single stage JP trigger that is tuned down to less than 3lbs, and a Vortex FS that is supposed to increase accuracy. It is, however, a standard Bushmaster 1/9 twist, chrome lined, 14.5" M4 barrel.

Like I said, the range I use that has a 300 yard range is just now opening a 600 yard line. More than a year ago I stated [u]once[/u] acheiving sub-moa with this gun at 300 using only a sandbag. Naturally some hot head called bullshit on me. So I went back with no less than 4 other board members to try it again. Nervous as I was that that one sub-moa group I acheived was a fluke, I went ahead and shot it again. As I recall, out of 4 groups, only one was slightly more than sub-moa. All the rest were just hardly sub-moa, but sub moa none the less.

I will not have the opportunity to get to that range for at least 3 weeks, but I will gladly give it my best shot again, this time out at 600. I am not going to say I will shoot moa, thats not whats being asked. I will state that I am supremely confident that I will be able to hit a life size B27 type silouette target regularly. I will use the gun mentioned above with inexpensive Walmart value pack ammo. For some reason that gun loves that ammo. I am sure I will need a few shots to check where I am shooting at that distance with that ammo and that gun. I have not yet shot that far, so I hope you will grant me a few warm up shots. But once I know where that gun is hitting with that ammo at that distance, I bet I will shoot the sh*t out of that B27 target.

Coltcarbine, if I do... you need to come back here and post a picture of yourself with your favorite AR holding a large sign that says "Hi, my name is Coltcarbine and I suck, and so does my  out of spec Colt". You can cut your head and face out if you so choose. If I cant do it, I will do the same with my Bushmaster saying I suck and so does my purple Bushmaster. Either one of us will be allowed to post the picture any time, any where on AR15.com that we wish.

You up for it?

I do it almost once a week.  I can't prove it unless you want to come to Colorado.  If you can't do it that does not mean others can't.  

Here are some pics from the sub-moa 300 yard range day...

This is the gun I use and the single sandbag I use to steady the gun.
[img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid37/p793269d47e83e16839837bb0f5cdf4a2/fd1d6180.jpg[/img]

This is me shooting one of the groups with another board member (M4Real spotting)
[img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid37/pfdbe2bfd3b1f51662a2a2de8e0a9ca0c/fd1d6187.jpg[/img]

This is the cut I had on my finger the day I did this! Hey... pull my finger [ouch]!
[img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid37/pab8e0d91f7360484f26353bcf415d2d3/fd1d6189.jpg[/img]

Here is the super-duper, specialty ammo I use to shoot these groups (available from WalMart about $11 per box of 40!)
[img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid37/p52a1abe57307ff16c898ac5795a65c1e/fd1d6190.jpg[/img]

One of the board members (AEM) measuring the first 3 shot group.
[img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid37/pe40786a1c915f4b19853c1dd99e983ab/fd1d6199.jpg[/img]

A close up of the 3 shot group;
[img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid37/p6c58ab928ea83804af419b8ef7126709/fd1d619a.jpg[/img]

The second 4 shot group and my personal best at that distance;
[img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid37/p0047ab6bdede2b616df059920506bf98/fd1d6197.jpg[/img]

The third 5 shot group
[img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid37/p89a34384c39122577125033a2e12aa6f/fd1d6194.jpg[/img]

The fourth group was another 5 shot group that was, as I recall, under 5", but not by much.

I will go back to that range around the first Sunday of next month to do this all again at 600. I will bring board members and cameras. For the most part I have no ego and will be the first to tell you if I cant do it. Even if that weren't the case, the other board members who will likely go with me will probably love to tell you I cant.