Popsbengo

On 2/16/2018 at 11:12 PM, bsbxl said:

I would be interested to know if there have been controlled tests of those methods (OCW, ladder, ...)? For example, if you did the procedure (OCW or ladder) five times in a row, would you end up with the same end result each time?

👍👍

We debated this a while ago and no doubt again in the near future!  Of course barrel harmonics are well understood and an optimised charge will result in better accuracy, it's just how one arrives at that.

What works is a matter of opinion and that's worrying from a scientific point of view.  The inferences drawn from exceedingly small samples with ever changing conditions (in the barrel) and extremely accurate measuring of charge weights (that vary with humidity) leaves many of the techniques that rely on just a few rounds very suspect from a statistical point of view.

I guess it's how much money your have, how much useful life you want to take from your barrel. How many unicorns you can see in velocity readings (from less than perfectly accurate chronos) is a particular bug-bear,  ridiculous claims of "flat spots" on charted data - I'd have more faith if it was repeated >5 times with exact conditions resulting in good matches of data.

If one goes to all this apparent bother then it's implicit to re-do tests every time a new batch of primers/bullets/powder is used.

Well, that's my opinion, just as valid/invalid as the next !😉

4 minutes ago, One on top of two said:

My only concern over this apart from the obvious burden which will no doubt be placed on the shooters .Is the pending augment that is going to take place between two party’s that are just as capable of being up there own backsides as each other ! 
this will not be sorted out over night that is for sure . 

just have to hold tight and wait . 

 

 

Here's to it all being quite innocent and resolved quickly  😁

38 minutes ago, One on top of two said:

 It’s always Money ! ! 
it will be about the damage to the butts caused by larger calibre rifles , and who’s gonna pay for the damage .

note . I’m not saying the larger cals ARE causing damage , just that will be there reason . 

And NRA will just get into a stalemate argument which will only end one way .....

us paying more money in some way , shape or form.

wait and see .

Maybe it is;  problem is it's their bat their ball (DIO that is).  The only reason to allow civi shooting is income.  I can't think of any other rationale as we surely accept that the bull shine about "readying the population for time of war" claptrap often seen in club constitutions is laughably out of touch with modern requirements.

I understand that the NRA are meeting with DIO in a couple of weeks to better understand what's behind the calibre limit ban on West Midlands/Wales military ranges.

That should be interesting...

It's also recommended to run an ultrasonic to degas fresh cleaning fluid before putting in the items to clean.  Run on until small bubbles stop being generated and the surface of the fluid gently "boils"

19 minutes ago, No i deer said:

So what mix would I need for cleaning brass and what mix would I need too clean my stainless muzzle brakes and mod..?

for the muzzle break I use detergent in my US cleaner,  hot water too. 

For brass citric acid crystals (half a teaspoon) in the water will brighten.  Detergent will loosen the carbon

3 hours ago, D Johnson said:

Hi All 

Not one for calling the police or reporting stuff as a rule. But I’m currently away from home working and the mrs sent me a screenshot off Facebook of a guy in the village nearby  posting a pic of a browning cynergy he claims to have just acquired !!. Now the problem being is this guy I know for a fact is not a licence holder or ever will be. Two ways to look at it are he’s either a total Walter Mitty or he has managed to get hold of something and is foolish enough to put it on Facebook???. I’ve a good working relationship with my FIrearms liaison guy and am tempted to just forward the screen grab on to him with a heads up on this character. Any thoughts guys ??? 

absolutely yes;  I'd have no qualms.

8 minutes ago, T65 said:

I have again tried the mirror method seems direct sunlight is better than 2 spot lights. The results are with scope 1 it is perfect both mechanical zero and optical zero are the same. Scope 2 is off by 3 clicks to the right from mechanical zero.
What now comes into play. Is why there is 20 clicks difference in the same 1 piece mount between scopes 1 and 2 if the only error between scopes is 3 clicks right ? Or is there something else that I am not factoring in.

Fitting skill?

Just saying

One every two minutes  - could it be wind?

If not I'd suggest tightening the nut behind the trigger 😉

29 minutes ago, No i deer said:

🤣😂.

Shooting in 25mph winds from 1000yds and its extremely difficult,I've done it once and it's a waste of ammo 🌬🌬🌬.

There are plenty of scopes out there that have alot of windage but Alot have reticles that will give you the option of an extra 10 plus minutes if you really wish to shoot in such windy conditions..

Good luck with that....

No I deer 😁💋

quite:   😂😂

I have my suspicions what the problem may be but I'll back out now.

1 hour ago, T65 said:

Rifle is a tikka T3 Tac A1 rings and mounts are picatinny.

 

Tikka - Well made rifle with integral picatinny rail.  If I understand your earlier comments: you assume the scope is ok, and you say you've tried another, if so I suspect your rings are not being lined up properly.

I assume you have actually shot this so you know the error is as stated?  If not how are you determining the scope is off axis? 

what's the rifle/action and what scope?

Is the ring picatinny or dovetail ?

My S&B PM11 mounted in Sphur mono mount was 2/10th of a mil off mechanical centre:  ie 2 clicks.  The action is a Barnard PL with a Barnard picatinny rail.

The stacking of tolerances of the fit of the mounts, the mounts themselves, the rail fixing alignment on the action top, the concentricity of the barrel to the action, and finally the internal accuracy of the scope all contribute to the necessary mechanical offset required to bring POI and POA into alignment.

For example: If you have 4" centres for the mounts and 1thou of an inch (less than a fag paper) out of alignment in the horizontal plane that's .25 Mil or 0.84moa windage adjustment (if my maths is up to it).  You can see that tiny mechanical errors quickly build up quite an optical adjustment.

If you are unhappy with the optical zero being well away from the mechanical centre you could try loosening everything and carefully re fitting with nice even take-up of screw tensions etc.  I had a scope "mounted" on a brand new Sako in Optiloc mounts by a well known gun shop in Derby.  It was completely crap - all the mechanical aptitude of a ham fisted ape.  10min in my man-cave and the mechanical zero was not far off the optical zero.  Lesson learned.

31 minutes ago, Trigger73 said:

Being new I'm curious as to which calibre you guys use for general targets and plinking? I bought a T3 22 250 last year as it was passed for land and I've not really shot it much as I've gotten into targets more than I thought so it's now for sale. 

I was told that with the 22 250 being a "barrel burner" and having a short barrel life, to sell it and go for a 223 or 243, I read that 243 is more expensive all round? 

Allegedly the 243 is a flatter trajectory so lends itself more so than the 223, that said from what I've seen and read both are good out to a fair old range? 

Your thoughts are much appreciated. 

👍

.243 is a hunting calibre, not a target shooting one, obviously it can be used as such if allowed.  .243 can exceed range velocity limits (22-250 most certainly does). Depends where you intend to shoot.  You could join a target shooting club and go to an organised shoot and/or military range (or the Army but that's a bit excessive😁).  

If it's just for fun at medium distances then .223 is cheap and versatile.  More than 500yds then .308 is also a cheapish alternative.  If you have money to spend then there's a whole lot of 6/6.5/7mm to choose from.

35 minutes ago, Ronin said:

Your quite correct

Have emended the post to include “members of the Artists Club under false pretences”

 

I get a little heated when this subject comes up as I absolutely despise stolen valour and have the deepest respect for those who serve our country.

 

👍

1 hour ago, Ronin said:

 

The chaps who enter a room and “sweep it” 

”Shooting” - “spotting” calls on the firing point and claim to be called Wupert

Those with fond memories of their time in “the regiment and seal team six”

Those who claim to be military but in fact short term reservist or weekend S A S (Saturday and Sunday) and those whom are members of the “Artists Club” 

Ja,  easily spotted, multi cam is soooo yesterday darling 😂

Stolen valour...... 🤬

I don't think lumping the  "Artists Club" in with aforementioned Walts etc is at all fair.   Ex serving military of all ranks deserving of respect.

Jeezuz H Christmas;  what some people will do!

35 minutes ago, One on top of two said:

It’s all part of the new “ urban operator “ 

language 

you tend to  see them in little groups on range days. Normally sporting beards. Shortish hair, Smock type jackets/cargo trousers and Casio G  shock watch’s. 😂😂

hit the nail on the head !😂😂

Walters & bloaters on a day out

Maybe they're unaware of the level of confusion?  Perhaps an update to their notice would be useful and make it "official" advice.

The NRA say "greater than 7.62"  Offa's have emailed members to say "bigger than .308/7.62" and I'm assuming Offas' have had it direct from Swynnerton.

All I can add is that in my dealings with DIO Swynnerton in a "past life", the T.O. was less than helpful (although his Landmarc staff did their best for us).

10 minutes ago, One on top of two said:

I’m a little confused. I could have sworn the ban notice that was first put up on the NRA site on the 19th said no larger than .308 

yet when I checked just now it’s says  temporary restriction on all firearms that exceed 7.62mm calibre is now in place. No mention of .308 .

Now am I going mad or has the wording been changed? 

Also does this mean I can’t use my .308 as it’s got a bullet diameter of  7.82mm ?.

Can somebody put me right please .

 

It says " not to exceed 7.62" Well, a .308 doesn't exceed 7.62 calibre so I think a fair assumption is .308 is the limit.  That then brings in other .30 cal rifles - or so a reasonable man might say.  It's still for the NRA to clarify in my opinion.

Eskdalemuir is worth the trip if you have a .338 or similar

Blimey,  what a lot of anger in one man (hint - not Ronin)

Why can't we name names?  If it's a true reflection on the service, or lack of it, then let's share the good and the "not so good" and stop skirting the issue.

"Trustpilot" for shooters !