[ARCHIVED THREAD] - My "new" tricked out Remington 700 (Page 6 of 8)
|
So I took the time to do a little counting and thus far we have....
27 posters claiming that the OP's .5 MOA accuracy is easily achieved and they can do better 13 claiming that they can achieve .5 MOA with a stock rifle (one of which claimed with mil-surp ammo) 1 claiming .5 MOA with M4 and 1-4 scope. 1 claiming .5 MOA with AR-15 and iron sights. I think a new shooting challenge thread may be called for ...possibly starting with a list of posters and their claims. |
|
Quoted:
So I took the time to do a little counting and thus far we have.... 27 posters claiming that the OP's .5 MOA accuracy is easily achieved and they can do better 13 claiming that they can achieve .5 MOA with a stock rifle (one of which claimed with mil-surp ammo) 1 claiming .5 MOA with M4 and 1-4 scope. 1 claiming .5 MOA with AR-15 and iron sights. I think a new shooting challenge thread may be called for ...possibly starting with a list of posters and their claims. Yeah we have a lot of snipers on the board huh? 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
So I took the time to do a little counting and thus far we have.... 27 posters claiming that the OP's .5 MOA accuracy is easily achieved and they can do better 13 claiming that they can achieve .5 MOA with a stock rifle (one of which claimed with mil-surp ammo) 1 claiming .5 MOA with M4 and 1-4 scope. 1 claiming .5 MOA with AR-15 and iron sights. I think a new shooting challenge thread may be called for ...possibly starting with a list of posters and their claims. Yeah we have a lot of snipers on the board huh? I'm pretty sure I remember hearing about someone calling Kyle Lamb a noob in a precision shooting thread here once. |
|
Quoted:
So I took the time to do a little counting and thus far we have.... 27 posters claiming that the OP's .5 MOA accuracy is easily achieved and they can do better 13 claiming that they can achieve .5 MOA with a stock rifle (one of which claimed with mil-surp ammo) 1 claiming .5 MOA with M4 and 1-4 scope. 1 claiming .5 MOA with AR-15 and iron sights. I think a new shooting challenge thread may be called for ...possibly starting with a list of posters and their claims. With quality ammo and assuming the rifle isn't shot out, that rifle is capable of better accuracy. Especially off the bench. I did it with no real bolt action experience while developing a load my rifle liked. Maybe OP just needs to get out and do it more. I'm sure his rifle is better than that. |
|
That is not bad for your first effort if you are not a rifle shooter. It could be the rifle, or you, or the ammo. Most rifles prefer a specific load for max accuracy.Check with the previous owner to see if he had a pet load for that rifle.
For cmparison, this is from my AR, ten shots with two flyers, so eight went into one hole smaller than a dime hole at 100 yards. I put this rifle togather from parts I bought here, I think I had $600-$800 in it, don't really remember. I am old, my eyes are bad, I am shaky. Target |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
My A Bolt .270 with a 4x Sporter scope does 3 shot ragged hole at 100. All the time, right? Here's a zero confirmation I shot with my pet load in 6.5 Creedmoor, three rounds before confirming data. http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j150/RictusGrin_2006/65-3rds_zpsc2118b7d.jpg Here's a shot at 756 yards to confirm elevation dope. The wind was switching up quite a bit at 10-12 mph. All targets are 1/3 IPSC in size. http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j150/RictusGrin_2006/657561024x768_zps250ce0e0.jpg And a cold bore shot at 600 yards. http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j150/RictusGrin_2006/65cold6001024x768_zpsadbdc31f.jpg Elevation at 547 yards. http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j150/RictusGrin_2006/655471024x768_zps2d394b2d.jpg Another check at 500 yards. http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j150/RictusGrin_2006/655001024x768_zpsb081ec9e.jpg Some 5-round groups I shot the first day I took it to the range. Each group was a different load, so there's some variation, and it was so windy that I had to shore up the target against a berm and set up on a bipod between the benches to get a steady sight picture. And yes, the groups do "tighten up" beyond 100 yards. http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j150/RictusGrin_2006/2012-05-24_17-01-06_526-1_zpsae38ce1d.jpg http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j150/RictusGrin_2006/2012-05-24_17-01-28_745-1_zpsfbb0f8b9.jpg http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j150/RictusGrin_2006/2012-05-24_17-32-11_983-1_zpse6fd9d3f.jpg http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j150/RictusGrin_2006/2012-05-24_17-17-30_931-1_zps3c281469.jpg http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j150/RictusGrin_2006/2012-05-24_17-43-15_810-1_zps70d6f91d.jpg Plenty of people have an idea what goes into achieving this kind of thing, regardless of barrel temperature and almost without respect to the load being used. Putting three in a clover leaf at some point isn't a qualifier. Your cuticles could use some work, dude. |
|
Quoted:
So I took the time to do a little counting and thus far we have.... 27 posters claiming that the OP's .5 MOA accuracy is easily achieved and they can do better 13 claiming that they can achieve .5 MOA with a stock rifle (one of which claimed with mil-surp ammo) 1 claiming .5 MOA with M4 and 1-4 scope. 1 claiming .5 MOA with AR-15 and iron sights. I think a new shooting challenge thread may be called for ...possibly starting with a list of posters and their claims. You forgot the two posters who claimed that one MOA was only acceptable for offhand accuracy. |
|
Quoted:
That is not bad for your first effort if you are not a rifle shooter. It could be the rifle, or you, or the ammo. Most rifles prefer a specific load for max accuracy.Check with the previous owner to see if he had a pet load for that rifle. For cmparison, this is from my AR, ten shots with two flyers, so eight went into one hole smaller than a dime hole at 100 yards. I put this rifle togather from parts I bought here, I think I had $600-$800 in it, don't really remember. I am old, my eyes are bad, I am shaky. Target What, exactly, is a "flyer". ? 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Some rounds need a bit of distance to "settle down" to use the term. To use a .308 AP round load I was testing as an example: It would penetrate a certain thickness of tree or steel plate at 25-50yds, but would actually penetrate more at 100-150, because the bullet was more stable at the longer range. Well, that's a little different. The further distance allows the bullet to get up to full speed so it penetrates better. What did I just read?  It's a well known fact that a rifle bullet takes 50 to 100 yards to get up to top speed. Handgun bullets get up to top speed in about 7 yards because they are designed for close in work. It's why a bullet rises as it goes down range. |
|
Quoted:
It's a well known fact that a rifle bullet takes 50 to 100 yards to get up to top speed. Handgun bullets get up to top speed in about 7 yards because they are designed for close in work. It's why a bullet rises as it goes down range. Sometimes they get "tired" half-way to the target and slow down, but then they get their second wind and speed up again. It's a well known fact. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Some rounds need a bit of distance to "settle down" to use the term. To use a .308 AP round load I was testing as an example: It would penetrate a certain thickness of tree or steel plate at 25-50yds, but would actually penetrate more at 100-150, because the bullet was more stable at the longer range. Well, that's a little different. The further distance allows the bullet to get up to full speed so it penetrates better. What did I just read? It's a well known fact that a rifle bullet takes 50 to 100 yards to get up to top speed. Handgun bullets get up to top speed in about 7 yards because they are designed for close in work. It's why a bullet rises as it goes down range. Oh God please just stop. 
|
|
Quoted:
It's why a bullet rises as it goes down range. Oh God please just stop.
[/quote] Hey, you can deny a proven phenomenon. You're just showing your ignorance. Why in the hell else would a bullet impact higher at 200 yards than 100 yards, if it weren't going faster and rising as it's going down range? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Some rounds need a bit of distance to "settle down" to use the term. To use a .308 AP round load I was testing as an example: It would penetrate a certain thickness of tree or steel plate at 25-50yds, but would actually penetrate more at 100-150, because the bullet was more stable at the longer range. Well, that's a little different. The further distance allows the bullet to get up to full speed so it penetrates better. What did I just read? It's a well known fact that a rifle bullet takes 50 to 100 yards to get up to top speed. Handgun bullets get up to top speed in about 7 yards because they are designed for close in work. It's why a bullet rises as it goes down range. Well, that's the most basic explanation, anyway. |
|
Quoted:
Hey, you can deny a proven phenomenon. You're just showing your ignorance. Why in the hell else would a bullet impact higher at 200 yards than 100 yards, if it weren't going faster and rising as it's going down range? Dude, I'm tellin ya. It's the Coriolis Effect. The rotation of the Earth speeds the bullet up, which in turn causes it to rise. It's basic physics. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Hey, you can deny a proven phenomenon. You're just showing your ignorance. Why in the hell else would a bullet impact higher at 200 yards than 100 yards, if it weren't going faster and rising as it's going down range? Dude, I'm tellin ya. It's the Coriolis Effect. The rotation of the Earth speeds the bullet up, which in turn causes it to rise. It's basic physics. Then you don't know physics from a astrology. The coriolis effect only takes effect when shooting north/south, and only with calibers of .408 and larger. |
|
Quoted:
It's a well known fact that a rifle bullet takes 50 to 100 yards to get up to top speed. Handgun bullets get up to top speed in about 7 yards because they are designed for close in work. It's why a bullet rises as it goes down range. Well, that's the most basic explanation, anyway.[/quote] Well, I'm trying to keep it simple for the newbs around here. They really get annoying, thinking they know something about long range shooting. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's why a bullet rises as it goes down range. No, that's due to the Coriolis Effect. Not inside 1000 yards, it's not. It is if you shoot from West to East. That's a completely different phenomenon. It's relativity. If you shoot from east to west, you lose about 1600 feet per second and you really have to adjust your trajectory figures. |
|
Quoted: So I took the time to do a little counting and thus far we have.... 27 posters claiming that the OP's .5 MOA accuracy is easily achieved and they can do better 13 claiming that they can achieve .5 MOA with a stock rifle (one of which claimed with mil-surp ammo) 1 claiming .5 MOA with M4 and 1-4 scope. 1 claiming .5 MOA with AR-15 and iron sights. I think a new shooting challenge thread may be called for ...possibly starting with a list of posters and their claims. The silence would be thunderous . |
|
Quoted: It's a well known fact that a rifle bullet takes 50 to 100 yards to get up to top speed. Handgun bullets get up to top speed in about 7 yards because they are designed for close in work. It's why a bullet rises as it goes down range. Ah . . . . . . you might want to . . . . . um . . . . . oh , never mind .  |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's a well known fact that a rifle bullet takes 50 to 100 yards to get up to top speed. Handgun bullets get up to top speed in about 7 yards because they are designed for close in work. It's why a bullet rises as it goes down range. Ah . . . . . . you might want to . . . . . um . . . . . oh , never mind .
Stay in yer own lane. I'm tryin' to educate these idgits around here who have no clue about long range shooting, external ballistics and rifles. They see the movie Shooter a couple times and they think anyone can shoot a manual M82. |
|
Quoted:
So I took the time to do a little counting and thus far we have.... 27 posters claiming that the OP's .5 MOA accuracy is easily achieved and they can do better 13 claiming that they can achieve .5 MOA with a stock rifle (one of which claimed with mil-surp ammo) 1 claiming .5 MOA with M4 and 1-4 scope. 1 claiming .5 MOA with AR-15 and iron sights. I think a new shooting challenge thread may be called for ...possibly starting with a list of posters and their claims. Bonjour! Atleast the one dude posted a pic of a target to atleast back it up. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: It's a well known fact that a rifle bullet takes 50 to 100 yards to get up to top speed. Handgun bullets get up to top speed in about 7 yards because they are designed for close in work. It's why a bullet rises as it goes down range. Ah . . . . . . you might want to . . . . . um . . . . . oh , never mind . Stay in yer own lane. I'm tryin' to educate these idgits around here who have no clue about long range shooting, external ballistics and rifles. They see the movie Shooter a couple times and they think anyone can shoot a manual M82.  |
|
This thread has really been bugging me, so I decided to do a little photo analysis and throw in a dime for size reference.
Here is a 5 shot group of mine from last year with my .308. IIRC, it was .41." It was somewhere in the .4"s. 
I put OP's picture in photoshop and resized the bullet holes to match the size of the holes in my group. Then I over-layed the dime from my picture onto his picture. 
A dime is .703" on a micrometer (I just checked.) Using photoshops' ruler tool, I did some calculating and his group works out to be .499 MOA. OP, the fact you are a beginning precision shooter, shooting with factory ammo is no excuse. We are all worse shooters for having seen your rifle and may God have mercy on your soul. |
|
Quoted:
This thread has really been bugging me, so I decided to do a little photo analysis and throw in a dime for size reference. Here is a 5 shot group of mine from last year with my .308. IIRC, it was .41." It was somewhere in the .4"s. http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y170/Misifits0138/arf1_zps009edec3.jpg I put OP's picture in photoshop and resized the bullet holes to match the size of the holes in my group. Then I over-layed the dime from my picture onto his picture. <a href="http://s5.photobucket.com/user/Misifits0138/media/arf_zps212a7dea.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y170/Misifits0138/arf_zps212a7dea.jpg</a> A dime is .703" on a micrometer (I just checked.) Using photoshops' ruler tool, I did some calculating and his group works out to be .499 MOA. OP, the fact you are a beginning precision shooter, shooting with factory ammo is no excuse. We are all worse shooters for having seen your rifle and may God have mercy on your soul. That's pretty clever. Have you seen OnTarget? |
|
Its fine, once it gets broken it and you get used to it, i'm sure you will be making cloverleafs.
Nice rifle Free Quoted:
Quoted:
if that is the 3 shot group at 100, you need to invest in a decent barrel That is a half inch. What should it be at 100 yards? One hole with no overlap? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
So I took the time to do a little counting and thus far we have.... 27 posters claiming that the OP's .5 MOA accuracy is easily achieved and they can do better 13 claiming that they can achieve .5 MOA with a stock rifle (one of which claimed with mil-surp ammo) 1 claiming .5 MOA with M4 and 1-4 scope. 1 claiming .5 MOA with AR-15 and iron sights. I think a new shooting challenge thread may be called for ...possibly starting with a list of posters and their claims. Bonjour! Atleast the one dude posted a pic of a target to atleast back it up. thats how I roll. 
|