Why I always load my own ammo

[DaveT]

It wasn't my intent to start a heated arguement and there seems to be 'furious agreement' around this despite differing viewpoints.

 

For myself.....

 

I know that I have to get off of my belly and put in positional trigger time.

 

I had a rifle which at 2 or 4 moa I had no confidence in.

 

Now I know it can return .5 moa I feel justified in upgrading triggrr etc alongside intense practice....no need to argue that one or other factor is more crucial...I need to do both.

 

As per Johns last post available time is always a constraint but I am fortunate enough to be able to afford decent kit....and that can't impede any shooter no matter their skill level.

 

I have no confidence in GGG in my gun which directly affects my performance so I will feed it SMK handloads.

 

For guys like Peter C his skills are such that he can compensate for ball ammo shortfalls....I can't and would rather address this via practice and handloads.

[gbal]

I've seen enough high and winning scores shot with this 'unacceptable' ammunition to show me otherwise, some people can't be convinced of that though....even when they see it with their own eyes.

 

JMH, remind me again how many rounds have been down PC's barrel and what ammo he's using?

mark,no one is disputing individual differences in skill levels,and that TO SOME EXTENT superior skill can compensate for inferior equipment....and that some buy better equipment,rather than acquire better skill;but there comes

a cross over point-when the ammo gets too bad,the skilled shooter will lose out.

 

In a duel,the super skilled olympic biathlete will lose out to the modest club shooter with his 308,if the distance is great,and the 22rf ammo is poor quality. I very much doubt that Djokovitch would beat even Murray in a strop,if Djokovitch had Rod Lavers raquet-a wooden Maxply fort-when did you last see any (ATP) player use a wooden raquet-it is just too much handicap in the modern game.

 

You really don't have a leg to stand on,and it would be unfair to pursue this,as you won't have a bipod either. :-)

 

It will be interesting to get some info on winners gear,etc but the principle remains(even if you play with a wooden raquet).

g

[John MH]

PC's rifle is a SGC produced Mk6 Billet Lower and DPMS style thick walled upper receiver. It is fitted with a 1 in 7 twist 20" SS Krieger barrel with A2 Bird cage flash eliminator. The chamber reamer used was a Wylde .223 IIRC. The gun has an A2 buttstock with Accuracy Speaks adjustable butt plate. Forend is a Compass Lake Free Float tube with standard A2 furniture. Trigger is the first ever Giessele Hi-Speed National Match Service Weight trigger imported into the UK. Scope is a an S&B Short Dot 1.1-4 with CQB reticule on LaRue SPR-E Mount. The rifle when I sold it to Peter had approx 3500 rounds through it but that's an estimate as I didn't keep records of rounds fired. He exclusively used NATO Ball ammo both RUAG and GGG, I supsect mostly GGG now. I won the CSR Winter League one year with that rifle, since I sold it I've not done so well.

[bradders]

It wasn't my intent to start a heated arguement and there seems to be 'furious agreement' around this despite differing viewpoints.

 

For myself.....

 

I know that I have to get off of my belly and put in positional trigger time.

 

I had a rifle which at 2 or 4 moa I had no confidence in.

 

Now I know it can return .5 moa I feel justified in upgrading triggrr etc alongside intense practice....no need to argue that one or other factor is more crucial...I need to do both.

 

As per Johns last post available time is always a constraint but I am fortunate enough to be able to afford decent kit....and that can't impede any shooter no matter their skill level.

 

I have no confidence in GGG in my gun which directly affects my performance so I will feed it SMK handloads.

 

For guys like Peter C his skills are such that he can compensate for ball ammo shortfalls....I can't and would rather address this via practice and handloads.

No heated argument here Dave, just discussion.

What worries me though is getting my point across, coz it it follows the normal traits shown here recently my replies will get deleted.

Je suis Bradders? Non Monsieur

[gbal]

Dave,just good natured discussion,even if some points seem initially unilaterally polemic.

 

Practice and good gear is the ways to go,to improve,even if rigorous personal development is the 'road less travelled".

 

As BD says,putting some numbers on my general point-IF the intrinsic accuracy/precision of your ammo/rifle combo is,say,3moa,then no amount of skill-even perfection-will allow top scores if your target (bull) is less than 3moa,over a reasonable course of fire (number of shots) because some at least will disperse outside your top score bull,and you will not know in advance which ones.

As such intrinsic dispersal increases,more than that of your competitors,you will be correspondingly vulnerable to defeat by a lesser skilled shooter,who has better rifle/ammo,eg a 1moa gear shooter has 2moa skill leeway;if his skill is within 2moa,he will win(strictly,won't lose...as the score rings are too far apart to discriminate over a short number of rounds.

g

[Laurie]

Laurie,interesting.Suggests that ,even with pretty indifferent brass and variable powder,it's the bullet that is the main component in ammo accuracy. (I bet it's the barrel in a rifle).

Not too surprising-your bullet change seems to be worth repeating some cold Feb afternoon,if the Russian 5.56 will give up it's bullets,and mate with some sierras etc. I can imagine the nail varnish remover versus laquer will be the messiest bit,if needed,but might result in some super spangles if it needs redoing.

georgina

 

One problem witn rebulleting some milspec surplus George is the combination of case-mouth crimp and a thick asphalt sealant compound on the bullet / inside of the neck. This Iraqui ammo was likie this and after pulling the bullets and using white spirit to remove the sealant from the case, the necks would barely hold the bullet. As I didn't have a 308 sizer die at the time with a removable decap pin, I had the added job of hammering all the cases into a Lee Loader to restore the neck tension.

 

American ROTC and National Guard rifle teams used to routinely pull the 150 and 173gn FMJBTs on issue .30-06 ammo back in the 1950/60s and replace them (with no other change, load fettling or whatever) with 168gn Sierra MKs in preparing for matches. It acquired the name 'Mexican Reload' as the process was apparently a bit like watching a crowd doing a Mexican Wave. Three presses and operators sat in line, press 1 had a seater die with its stem set a little deep for the COAL and the arsernal round had its bullet pressed in to crack the sealant / crimp; press 2 had a collet puller; press 3 had the SMKS and seated a new bullet in the case. Hundreds, sometimes thousands, of rounds would be rebulleted in a session. It's always mentioned with respect to .30-06, but I presume it survived into the 7.62 era. I do know that the Australian TR rifle team used to routinely do this too with Footscray 7.62 replacing it with a 150gn Lapua (pre the 'less than 156gn bullet weight rule change), and presume this was done too at club level, the reason being that the milspec ammo was supplied free or at a large reduction at the time to the TR shooting community.

 

I've never tried it with 5.56, but would expect similar gains. Replacing a 62gn SS109 bullet with a 69gn SMK would likely require a charge adjustment. Now that milspec ammo is boxer primed, it's much easier to buy the stuff at £50 or 55 / 100 and reload it after shooting!

[bradders]

Actually Mex Match as it's termed came bout as a reference to making match ammunition the lazy way, aka Mexican way, hence a Dremel tool is referred to as a Mexican Mill.

 

This ammo you refer to as Iraqi, is that the same as the Farsi you referred to earlier? because Farsi is the language spoken in Iran

[Laurie]

Actually Mex Match as it's termed came bout as a reference to making match ammunition the lazy way, aka Mexican way, hence a Dremel tool is referred to as a Mexican Mill.

 

This ammo you refer to as Iraqi, is that the same as the Farsi you referred to earlier? because Farsi is the language spoken in Iran

 

Yes, same stuff. Bearing in mind its original condition and the timing, puchasers assumed it was Iraqi recovered after their defeat in Desert Storm, but we never knew for certain and the retailer wasn't telling. (There was an article in the old Guns Review magazine around the same time about the stuff locals and returning US / European expats picked up in Kuwait after the Iraquis fled and before the authorities clamped down on it.)

 

Given the regional history, assuming it came from that part of the world, it could also have been a hangover from the preceding Iran-Iraq war of course. Pretty much rubbish whichever way you looked at it and testament to how people will convince themselves that 'cheap' equals 'bargain' or 'good value'.

[gbal]

Thanks Laurie-I had some misgivings about the whole idea-hence my "joke' that the fun bit might be replacing the soviet utility laquer with some jazzy decadent nail varnish in spangly duffer shades. Some of the newer Wolf/Barnaul seems laquer free-good news for Aug chambers-and one reason I'm playing with it,though can't see a podium in CSR anytime (soon or late).It was more seriously a chance to test the ' the bullet is the biggest variable' idea,presumably with pretty so so other components.But it's a cold Feb ,and yet I'm wondering-why bother,esp with all the likely retention issues.I know mil seconds bullets don't shoot very well. I note GGG 5.56 was £40/100 when it seemed a bit better-about twice what Wolf used to be,though of course all this stuff is the easy way to go-primary extraction is a real consideration,and the Russian stuff has been flawless.But even if Mr 11 falls,I still hanker after accurate hits "good enough is fine,but good enough for what' still nags away. I was looking for some GGG up this way,more to get " fired in my Aug" reloadable brass,but it's not readily available. Ah well,tomorrow is another day.

g

[DaveT]

No heated argument here Dave, just discussion.

What worries me though is getting my point across, coz it it follows the normal traits shown here recently my replies will get deleted.

Je suis Bradders? Non Monsieur

Keep it coming...debate always good even if agreement is elusive....just shows there are many ways to skin that cat!

[gbal]

Keep it coming...debate always good even if agreement is elusive....just shows there are many ways to skin that cat!

Well said,Dave...would that often be Schroedinger's cat?

g

[brown dog]

What worries me though is getting my point across, coz it it follows the normal traits shown here recently my replies will get deleted.

Je suis Bradders? Non Monsieur

 

You poor persecuted martyr ....you well know it's nothing to do with expressing opinions, it's simply 'don't name-call or insult anyone' which could also be expressed as: 'don't be an online Fotze' - which is more of a challenge for some than others

[tackb]

 

You poor persecuted martyr ....you well know it's nothing to do with expressing opinions, it's simply 'don't name-call or insult anyone' which could also be expressed as: 'don't be an online Fotze' - which is more of a challenge for some than others

 

so german gets past the filter ? hmmmmmm ..........

[bradders]

 

You poor persecuted martyr ....you well know it's nothing to do with expressing opinions, it's simply 'don't name-call or insult anyone' which could also be expressed as: 'don't be an online Fotze' - which is more of a challenge for some than others

Well if it sin't you deleting it's one of your foot soldiers, is it not?

Look at the latest deletion in the shooting show thread, for darting them to be more encouraging towards new shooters.

 

Is Johnsons your preferred brand of cotton wool? coz it seems you can't say anything remotely questionable for fear of offending someone

 

[bradders]

Double tap of fun

[gbal]

so german gets past the filter ? hmmmmmm ..........

 

...especially Schroedinger's pussy

[brown dog]

Well if it isn't you deleting it's one of your foot soldiers, is it not?

Look at the latest deletion in the shooting show thread, for daring them to be more encouraging towards new shooters.

 

Is Johnsons your preferred brand of cotton wool? coz it seems you can't say anything remotely questionable for fear of offending someone

 

 

 

I refer you to my earlier German lesson... ....you're being one. Again.

[bradders]

NATO requirements for SS109/M855/whatever you want to call it are, I believe, 100mm at 100M

 

No one believes me though

[bradders]

From another site

 

http://www.ss109.com

"NATO specifications for SS109 (U.S. M855) Ball require a 61.7 grain

(q 1.5 grains) with a hardened steel penetrator at a velocity of 3,025 fps
(q 40 fps) from a 20 inch barrel 25 meters from the muzzle. Typical
velocity 15 feet from the M16A2's muzzle is around 3,100 fps. The accuracy
requirement from a test fixture equates to a maximum of approximately four
MOA over the 100 to 600 yard range. Typical accuracy of average lots in an
M16A2 is about 2+ MOA. This round must also penetrate a nominal 10 gauge
SAE 1010 or 1020 steel test plate at a range of at least 570 meters (623
yards). The M193 round will penetrate this same plate reliably at 400
yards, and about half the time at 500 yards. The 5.56mm and 7.62mm NATO
rounds will penetrate it reliably out to 700 yards or more. Nominal
ballistics for M193 and M855 Ball rounds are given in an accompanying
table. The tables were constructed from the latest data supplied by the
U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory at Aberdeen Proving Ground,
Maryland.

[Laurie]

I'd believe you Mark. How this requirement is actually defined and measured is crucial though as I doubt if the Army uses a simple centre to centre measurement. Back in SMLE / 303 days it was a 'Figure of Merit' shot from 20 round groups fired from SMLEs in clamp-rests at 600 yards.

 

A 'mean point of impact' of the 20 hits was determined after the test using a method which was clearly outlined to ensure consistency, then the distance from this point to each individual strike was measured and this averaged to give the 'Figure of Merit'. To be accepted, the value had to be within a certain value. To account for wind, two rifles / targets were shot side by side with shots taken simulataneously, the second group shot with ammo from a batch known to be of an acceptable standard and acting as a control for the ammo under test.

[bradders]

I have some 300yd statistics to post up from last sundays match to show some comparisons.

Don't ban me yet

[brown dog]

http://www.men-defencetec.de/en/produkte/militaer/556-mm-x-45-223-rem/detailview/?tx_men_pi1%5Bdetail%5D=9

[bradders]

OK,

On Sunday we shot a 300yd rapid fire on a Fig 12, 10 shots in 60 secs.

There seems to have been a variety of ammo, SS109 in RUAG, GGG and FN varieties.

There was also quite a number of people using either Sierra 69's and 77's, as well as Berger 73's and 77's.

 

Max score 50pts

List of scores and ammo types, nothing scientific

Service optic, 4.5x scope, mag rested

GGG 44

RUAG 48

GGG 49

77's 48

GGG 47

GGG 50

69's 43 (1 miss)

GGG 45

FN 47

GGG 46

GGG 43

GGG 47

73's 50

 

Practical Optic, bipods and no magnification limit

77's 47

77's 48

77's 50

77's 50

77's 50

Unknown 48

55's 45

69's 48

GGG 50

GGG 46

 

 

While there appear to be more possibles in the Practical class, this can mostly be attributed to bipods and hi mag scopes.

 

You can see that this sampling of top scores from .223 shooters in both classes shows that neither ammo gives either a distinct advantage or disadvantage

 

In fact I see another score further down of a 9-0 (1 miss)

This was shot with RG no less, which many deem to be the crappiest of the lot.

As for that shooters ability? well I lent him the rifle and ammo

[DaveT]

One thing we have not really highlighted is the degree of confidence that the shooter has in his kit and ammo ....totally regardless of what said combo is theoretically capable of ...speaking for myself this is fundamental......if I don't believe that I will shoot well then I just don't...weak mind I guess?

 

If GGG ammo is shooting to the required Mil-specification then 'happy days'........I just wish I had been aware of the 4MOA outside limit before I bought 1000.....my bad for not researching!

 

GGG is also clearly good enough for CSR if that is your ONLY demand upon it as Bradders stats plainly show....can't argue with 'hits'.

 

As a purely personal 'thing' I want ALL my guns to shoot much tighter than 1MOA.......my AR may well get used for live game one day (not really bought for that but why impose limitations?)

 

So we are (are we?) left with complete satisfaction?....IE

 

• GGG etc ammo types work within the demands of CSR as a discipline and related to the target sizes used etc etc.....tick.
• I want greater accuracy from an AR so use SMKS....I accept the hand-loading overhead.....tick.
• Every commentator in the above posts is correct in their own context and against their own requirements....tick.

Simples?

 

What else shall we debate today? !!! Dives for foxhole!

[bradders]

So exactly what size is that group in the first pic Dave?