All Activity

Ten years now with the AUG. I still like it. It stays ready in the house, and it goes with me on most trips, riding in an Eberlestock backpack. https://eberlestock.com/collections/packs/products/cherry-bomb-pack Its been carried in and out of hotels and relative’s homes in that pack without notice, or at least without comment. I’ve used it in numerous classes and some matches. I’ve shot mostly handloaded ammunition, with bullets ranging from 40 to 77 grains. Most have been 55 FMJBT, as one would expect. Favorite bullets include the Nosler 64 grain bonded SP (Which I think is now discontinued), Sierra 65 Game King BTSP, and the Sierra 69 MK. The only changes or modifications have been a sight, a light, and a sling. I’m still using the Trijicon 1-4X Accupoint scope in Larue mount, a Magpul sling mounting loop, VTAC sling, and a Surefire light in an offset mount. I have a buis sight for a SCAR I’m going to mount, in order to have the same sights as my SCAR. That’s it. No trigger mods like I keep reading about. I simply don’t see the need on this rifle. Compared to an AR-15? Accuracy is not quite as good as a good AR, but it’s close and I’ve definitely seen worse shooting ARs. More importantly, it weighs more than an equivalent barreled AR. On the plus side, I like the bullpup configuration for a number of reasons. One of those is that although heavier than it probably needs to be, it puts the weight closer to my body so it feels easier to hold at the ready than an AR or other conventional rifle in similar or even less weight. Reliability is excellent. I love the magazines. I wish a .22 conversion was made, or even better- a lightweight .22 model like the various .22 ARs. I also wish the Steyr 9mm conversion was readily available, but the government has chosen to protect us from imported gun barrels. More caliber options in general might be nice. Word is that Steyr sells them in .300 BLK elsewhere, but won’t sell it here for some reason. I have spare pieces-parts for about anything I can imagine. Mostly, I want to protect against foolishly losing something like a spring. Everything was easy to get and reasonably priced. The SCAR is still my first choice as my do-all rifle, but the AUG misses out due only to the cartridge that won’t cover as much. The AUG is my do-almost-all rifle, or perhaps better put: My realistic do-all rifle.

Ten years have passed since I got the SCAR. Not much to add; it keeps plugging along. It’s had a strong challenge from my newest precision rifle, but the SCAR remains my favorite rifle. It’s still my choice as a do-all rifle. My pick if I can only take one.

I’ve been using an SWFA 20X for F-Class this summer, at 300-1,000 yards. I am an optics snob but have no complaints. The repeatability of the clicks seems to be spot on. I bought this scope from SWFA’s “Sample List” as a demo model for $239. Yes, $239.

BTT simply because this is good info. It has been a handy resource for me.

https://ruger.com/products/sfar/models.html It must be New Ruger Season. This one handles .308-class cartridges but is .223/5.56 size.

https://ruger.com/products/lcCarbine/models.html My first observation: I’m sure it’s great fun and all, but the point I see of the 5.7x28 is it fits in itty bitty guns. This new Ruger: -Holds 20 rounds of 5.7x28 -Has a 16” barrel -Weighs 5.9 lbs The Ruger SR556 (AR): -Holds 20, 30, 40 or more .223/5.56 rounds -Has a 16” barrel -Weighs 6.4 lbs MSRP? The 5.7 is $979 The SR556 is $989 The SR556 has been discounted pretty well in recent months, but I doubt the 5.7 will be much, if any, below retail if and when you find one. With some of the goofy stuff I’ve bought, I’m not in much place to question the justification of any gun, but what I just posted is what jumped out at me. And it really jumped.

The results have been posted. They don’t show my score at 1,000 yards, which I assume was to spare me from embarrassment. I was still the top F-Class shooter. (I was also the only F-Class shooter since everyone else there this time shot a standard NRA match rifle. That makes me also the last place F-Class shooter. But we’ll just ignore all of that.)

I’m back from the Palma match. It went smooth and quick. We were done shooting in 90 minutes. The course of fire was 15 shots each at 800, 900, and 1000 yards, so I now have holdovers to 1,000. At 800 and 900, it took a little less elevation than the tables show, so by the time I got to 1,000 it was adding up. The tables were showing from 9.0 Mils to 9.4 at 1,000 yards but it only took 8.8 Mils. They have electronic target scoring there, so no more time spent in the pits pulling and marking targets. A neat side benefit to this is it gives you velocity figures at the target. I don’t always remember to write this info down, but having the info would only be one more thing to keep me up nights thinking about. FWIW, at 900 yards, my load was making 1574 fps and had a Standard Deviation of 10 fps. (6.5 Creedmoor with Hornady 140 ELD-M bullet.)

I was just looking at my Long Range .22 scope settings and comparing them to those on my Accuracy International 6.5 Creedmoor. Both are in mils. .22, 50 yd zero———6.5 Creed AI, 100 yd zero 75 yards .8 Mil———240 yards .8 Mil 110 yds 2.5 ————-450 yds 2.6 165 yds 5.1 —————700 yds 5.0 200 yds 6.8—————800 yds 6.1, 900 yds 7.4 240 yds 9.0—————1000 yds 8.8

And I just signed up for a Palma match next Sunday. That’s 15 rounds each at 800, 900, and 1,000 yards.

Less wind drift from the high-bc 6.5mm bullet is the main difference. This makes it more forgiving of shooter error. Roughly translated from inches, a 10mph left/right wind blows my 6.5CM load about one scoring ring less than my .308 load. At a place where the wind is hard to read or swirls, like where this was, that can add up to a lot of points across the match just from wind shifts. Add in my bad wind calls and hold offs, and there’s some more.

I know nothing about F-Class, so I wouldn't know where to start, but I am interested in the practical difference between .308 and 6.5 Creedmoor. You say "life was much easier". How so?

That went pretty well. My back is killing me, but that’s expected. I mostly improved on last time.

Oh yeah- I had mostly used a .308 before, except for that .223 experiment. This time I used a 6.5 Creedmoor. Life was much easier.

Its here, and it’s been here for a year. And I think it’s gonna stay here. What I didn’t know when I got it was they were about to be discontinued and replaced with a very different model. I need to hang onto this one. I’ve had it out shooting several times at both the clubs I belong; one nearby with 100-yard range and another more distant place with a 240-yard range. I’ve given it enough use for some thoughts. First, the two main things. It’s compact and it shoots well. This thing is small, light, and handy. I can read the manufacturer’s weight and size figures, but if I don’t have a rifle in my hands, I have a hard time really knowing what it will be like. I especially have trouble grasping weight figures when they are given to me. Even a simple comparison to another rifle would help me. Therefore: Compared to a typical 20” barrel Winchester 94, this CZ 527 is a fraction of an inch shorter but over a half pound lighter. Compared to a standard Ruger 10-22 Sporter, it’s a fraction of an inch longer and a little over a half pound heavier. So call it right in the middle between those two. Like I said, it is small, light, and handy. How does it shoot? It does surprisingly well. At least I was surprised. I had a hard time coming up with what to expect for accuracy. CZ rifles usually shoot well, but the 7.62x39 cartridge isn’t exactly known for precision. All I had for test ammo was all I ever expected to need or use: Steel cased, Berdan primed, and as cheap as I could get it. None was bought within the past 15 years, and probably closer to 20+. Cutting to the chase, ANY and ALL of that ammo shot into 1.5 MOA at 50 and 100 yards. It could have been better I guess, but it sure could’ve been a lot worse and I wouldn’t have been surprised by it. That’s with a 4X scope that I never could get focused, but more on that later. Looking around online, that seems to be typical accuracy for these. Some report even better, and this one might (should?) do better after a scope change. I wouldn’t have thought this would be the case, and I honestly don’t know how it is possible. OH, THAT TRIGGER Mmmmmm I have to talk about the set trigger. I like it a lot. A LOT. I’ve used set triggers on Muzzleloaders but never owned a modern rifle with them. There used to be a couple of Steyr rifles with double set triggers floating around this area. I’ve messed with them but didn’t care for them. The trigger pull was nice of course, but the trigger guard seemed crowded and the reach felt unnatural. This CZ uses a single set trigger. One trigger. You can use it normally, or push it forward until it clicks to “set” it. I haven’t measured mine yet, but reports I read say in normal configuration it’s around 3.0-3.5 pounds, and when set it’s around a pound or just under. This one is great to use. The normal trigger is fine for general use, and the set trigger is nice to have at the bench or for other fine work. It’s easy to use, and VERY importantly, I can’t think of any drawbacks to it. I am sure it’s more complicated and adds more parts, but unless it starts freezing up in dusty use (could happen) I’m not going to worry about it. If it was a double set, I wouldn’t like it near as much, if at all, due to the space taken up in the guard by two triggers. Function was fine, as expected. It’s a mostly-Mauser-type bolt action. It’s not the smoothest feeding rifle but is OK. The bolt itself runs very nicely, but feeding from that stack of tapered steel cases can’t be the easiest. The last round feeds so smoothly I always thought it was empty and had to pause and tilt it over to check until I got used to that. CZ centerfire rifles have a “backwards” safety that always get comments or abuse. Rather than the typical back for safe/forward for fire, it’s the opposite. Jeff Cooper went so far as to suspect it was used on their dangerous game rifles as a communist plot to get capitalists killed, and I don’t think he was entirely joking. If it was a sliding safety, maybe it would bother me more. It is a rocking thumb piece. I once read it helps to think of it as a stubby hammer that you are cocking to shoot, and I had that in my head as I went into this. That must have worked! With that thought planted in my head, it was just fine; almost natural, really. Now for some more excruciating detail. SIGHTING Yes, it comes with some. Real iron sights! I zeroed the iron sights first. I bought Quick Detach throw lever rings* so I could switch between scope and irons if needed, so wanted to get a good solid zero with the irons. The CZ iron sights are really good. I’d say they might be the best open sights on a factory rifle I know of today. The sight picture is good with a square rear blade and squared notch, and the front sight on current models being a red fiber optic. Fiber optic sights aren’t my favorite because they can be fragile, but this may be the most rugged I’ve seen. The sight itself is well designed, plus it has a protective hood guarding it. This hood is skeletonized to allow light in to the sight. The front is adjustable for elevation, and rear adjusts for deflection. Without getting into it here, neither adjusts in a normal fashion, but adjust easy once you know how, and they look like they should stay put. * A word about scope rings for the CZ 527. If you want anything more than fixed mount rings in medium height, expect to pay a little. CZ rings are different from other makers’ ring design anyway, and the 527’s are different from other CZs! Also, most 527 rings are on the high side since the 527 used to have a bolt handle shape that caused clearance problems with a lot of scope eyepieces. It’s not a huge problem. You can get aluminum fixed rings from CZ for $30. If you just have to be picky like me, and get the lowest height rings AND in QD form, expect to pay $100. The same rings from the same company (Warne) but for 3/8” .22 rails will be at least $20 less. Even their rings for Tikka rifles run less. I spent some time deciding what scope to use. The handiness of it screams for something small like a 1-4X variable or even a 2.5X fixed. On the other hand, it shoots well enough to make more magnification tempting. In the end, I got a Leupold 2.5X fixed power. It’s one of the lightest scopes currently made, and I couldn’t resist that for this neat little rifle. It sure takes a lot of concentration (and some creative targets) to shoot groups on paper without more magnification, but it has been plenty for general playing around. For my initial shooting I did what I always do and picked a scope that wasn’t being used on another rifle at the moment. This time it was a Leupold 4X Rimfire Special. I chose it before the rifle even got here. For starters, 4X should be enough to tell if the new rifle had any potential or needed to be traded away ASAP. I wasn’t sure if the newer design bolt handle completely corrected the clearance issue either, and this little scope would be OK regardless. After some more thought, the finer reticle in that Rimfire model might help on paper, and the overall size seemed appropriate, so I considered leaving it on the rifle. Leupold scopes have a fantastic reputation, but I’m one of the few who tries to avoid them. Their traditional focus method of screwing the eyepiece in and out always gives me fits! Usually I never so get them focused for me, and if I do, they won’t stay. Occasionally I will come across one I can work with, but usually not. I guess I’m “special” because I’ve only heard one or two other people complain of it. My best shooting buddy is one of them. Admittedly, neither of us have the best eyes in the world. I can usually use them well enough in the field or just playing around, but trying to shoot little groups on paper with them is a struggle. This 4X Rimfire Special had been on an integrally suppressed .22 for a long time and saw a lot of use without a problem, but it was rarely used to shoot paper. All that was to explain the rifle should do better than what I got from it on paper. It took so much concentration to shoot groups on paper that I couldn’t shoot for very long at a time. I had a lot of hesitation going with the Leupold 2.5X because of this, but like I said, the compactness of that scope was too tempting. I am glad I went that direction, because it has been fine for general goofing around, and is so small it “fits”. Once I got the holds, hitting the IPSC sized silhouette steel at 200 and 240 was easy enough. The first time out, I got four out of five standing at 240, and they were good hits. Thinking about that on the way home, it’s the best I could hope for, and better than I expected. Thinking about it now, that line of thought sums up the rifle pretty well. The best I could hope for. I am glad I got it. However... After I bought this rifle, but before it arrived, our government banned the import or Russian ammo. Since situations with Russia have only gotten worse since then, I don’t see that changing any time soon. Right after this rifle arrived, I stopped at a large farm and ranch store that carries guns. They had Russian 7.62X39 ranging from $9.99 to $12.99 for 20 rounds. All of it was steel cased and Berdan primed. That’s a lot less than prices on the 5.56 they had, and overall wasn’t bad compared to other prices that day, but it’s also a lot more money than it used to be. I don’t see it getting any cheaper. The ammo I had on hand was marked $2.99 on each box. Those weren’t the best prices when I bought them, but those days are long gone now. If you have a supply of 7.62x39 ammo already, I think a bolt action in the caliber is definitely a rifle worth getting. If not, I would have to think about it. A quick look online shows 7.62x39 at 37.5 cents at the low end, or $7.50/20 rd box. That translates to around $8.00-8.50 at a local store, give or take. You can still walk into a store, get 200 rounds, tax included, and get a little change from a hundred bucks, but not much. I don’t know how much longer you can. HANDLOADING Let’s get stupid. A year or so ago, I might not have thought much about reloading for one of these except for my sick curiosity. Now, between the ammo situation changing drastically, and it showing potential for great things, I want to try some experiments. With things as they are, components aren’t easy to find, but that only makes us want to try harder, right? I want to start simple. I want to pull the factory bullets from ammo I have, and replace it with something like Hornady SSTs in the same weight. Those are starting to show up now. And if I want to really go nuts, Lapua makes bullets in the proper size and weight. Oh yeah, the fun may only be beginning with this thing. I’m glad I got one, especially since they stopped selling them. I’d love to have another one or two in other calibers. Among others, they made them in .221 Remington Fireball, which I think would be a fun little combination.

Yep, I’m waking up a seven to eight year old thread. I’ve shot maybe four F-class matches since then, but never more than one per year. Most of that was Mid-Range. A friend who shoots these always made fun of my “annual match”, but I even broke that poor record of attendance. It had been at least four years (five?) since I had shot any F-Class when I crawled back out last month. It was a Mid-Range/3x600 match: Two matches in one. Mid-Range is twenty shots each at 300, 500, and 600 yards, for 60 rounds and 600 points possible. The 3x600 is twenty shots at 600, and twenty more, then twenty more for another 60 rounds and 600 points. You get a few minutes break to cool the rifle and yourself between strings. I got a new gee-whiz rifle in March and since I didn’t have any zeroes beyond 240 yards in the time since, I wanted to use one of these matches to walk it out that far. I didn’t want to go straight from 240 to 1,000 and hope the charts were right. They would’ve got me close, sorta kinda, but I’d rather not do that. The targets are now all electronically scored, so a miss is reported as a miss with no other information. Now that I have data to 600, I haven’t decided if I’ll wait for a Palma match later this year (800, 900, 1,000 yards) to walk it out some more, or trust the charts and jump right into a 1,000 yard match. It may sound obvious, but while 600 yards is a big reach, that 400 yard step to 1,000 is still a big one to take all at once. Tomorrow is another Mid-Range/3x600. Can I make two matches within one calendar year? I am registered, paid, have everything ready…and woke up with a cold and sore throat this morning. I gradually got worse throughout the day. I’ve been in bed since 6pm, hoping plenty of rest will reverse that trend and I’ll make it.

This is all California. (You can see the "ca.gov" at the bottom of the label). It requires this if they're going to sell the item in the state of California. Because in California EVERYTHING causes cancer and birth defects. It's just like their idiotic "handgun roster" and "waiting periods". California has descended into a vast wasteland of regulations, and useless rules that produce exactly nothing in regards to any improvement in anything remotely related to quality of life.

I've always been a Glock man. I see no reason to change. However, I did allow for one H&K to slip in there. [img]https://i.imgur.com/DHc9fBQ.jpg?2[/img] [img]https://i.imgur.com/vkMLmIU.jpg?2[/img] [img]https://i.imgur.com/bNGlJIu.jpg?2[/img]

We had our yearly 4-H Shooting Sports tournament for Rifle and Pistol this weekend. All airguns, held on our airgun range inside our “barn” on the fairgrounds. We have done this for several years now, and it was a week-long marathon affair for most of that time. A shortage of instructors has caused us to make it a two-day event held the opening weekend of the county fair. Since we try to do a variety of things during our shooting season, we don’t spend all of our time doing competition-based practice. With that in mind, I’m always impressed how well they do when made to shoot that way in the Tournament, especially prone position rifle. Some of them only got to practice that one time this year. They make me proud every year. On the downside, we had to disqualify a few for safety violations. Specifically, for not keeping their finger out of the trigger guard when not shooting. There is nothing they are told more, or more strongly, yet we have a few each year who fail me. I’ll never understand it.

I saw last week the local gun shop has plenty of guns in .30 Super Carry. Golly gee, I wonder if they aren’t selling, and why ever not?

What a beautiful rifle! Great find! Do you reload? That’s definitely your best option with the .348 Winchester.

Inspired by your story, I bought this when I saw it locally. 1955 date of manufacture. Original finish with crisp markings and wood in nice condition. Not easy to find the ammo, and I have no plans to do anything other than put a few rounds through it, clean it, and keep it. But I’m pleased to have one!

I was out of the M&P world again, but I’m now back in again. I traded my M&P 2.0 Compact 9 for a Sig P320 around a year and a half ago. Tuesday, I bought a used M&P Shield 9. I was looking for an off-side carry spare, and was leaning toward the Sig P365. This Shield was in the used case for $299, and he priced it to me at $269. For that price, my preference changed quickly and easily. I will learn to like it. Semi-drift but not really: I have owned a small Kahr for quite a while that I like and shoot OK for it’s size. I’ve carried it in a pocket a lot. Why I don’t simply use it here is curious even to me. No, I do know why. The Shield is just enough bigger to be easier to shoot. Or at least it seems that way so far. Since the plan is for belt carry and I can go with a larger gun, the Shield seems fitting. This got me thinking how good we have it in some ways in the world of guns. I felt the need for a gun that was so little larger in size that it holds just one more round of 9mm. Not only did one exist, but I had a selection. That cracks me up. When I was entering the gun buying world, the variety of handguns seemed plentiful but it was a fraction of today. If you wanted a 9mm or .45, you had your choice of Service-size guns and that was about it. There were the occasional exceptions like the Star PD and BKM, but they were relatively uncommon. An example of the few alternatives would be a Commander instead of a Government Model 1911. Most companies didn’t offer you that much of an alternative. If you liked S&W 9mms and wanted a more compact gun than the 39/59, you were out of luck. Later, when they brought out the 469 it was BIG news. Now you can pick guns in 1/8” size intervals and have choices at each stop of the way.

I haven’t made anything g in a long time.

Members 1 Posted May 23 Barry I am getting a new smart phone (not sure of model/size yet but was looking for someone to make me a tough kydex type case similar to what W. Willson described above and I copy and paste his words below in BOLD letters. " All, I asked Barry if he could make me a cell phone holster that would do a couple things that no other hostler on the market today can do. 1) Protect my phone from being flexed if I roll up onto it when crawling around under a car, playing with my kids, etc. Smart phones are great, but if you flex or twist them, they will break. 2) Make a holster that if snagged on something as you walk by will not break. So many times I've broken the belt clip off of a holster by simply catching it on something as I walk past. This holster is exactly what I asked for and man is this thing tough. You could stand on it with the phone inside and the phone would be fine. The belt clip has a 'hook' on either side that has a death grip on the belt and won't let go. There really isn't a chance that the holster would fall off your belt. The belt clip is longer than it needs to be, so you can pivot the whole holster to make it more comfortable when you're sitting and/or driving. I had it made a bit larger than needed so both of my smart phones (personal a bit smaller than work) will fit. It isn't small and it isn't cute, but it does exactly what I want it to do. Thanks Barry! Finger hole in bottom to push the phone up for removal. You can see why it won't come off your belt. with emphasis on tough and won.t flex phone because I am a fair size guy and my work puts me in many tight places and some times even lying down to be able to get low enough to see what's needed. Since I have never carried a smart type phone on my belt before I also wondered if you offer or can make a design that can be carried either verticle or horziontal and maybe this conversion feature could be accomplished by having two bolt on clips w/ two bolts each that could be unbolted and turned to provide that option. I would want the kydex clips that make a full 360 deg spring open loop so the phone will not come off if it gets accidently picked up on, and I like the idea he had of extra long clips to allow re positioning the case for the sake of comfort for the wearer. Also the finger hole mentioned to allow wearer to start to begin pushing the phone out of the case. I also think an adjustable retention bolt would also be in order. I am very open to your ideas and suggestions Thx Larry Quote