BarryinIN

What I was hearing about the R-51 trigger was that it was very much like a Glock/XD/M&P trigger, but with a longer reset. However, I was getting this from rabid 1911 devotees. In the case of one in particular, it's possible that any non-1911 trigger is going to feel the same as any other non-1911 trigger to him.

Re: Remington R-51 I heard that one distributor (Davidsons?) shows a preorder price of $318. If that's tried and they will sell for around $375 in local gun shops, they will sell a lot. I'm not that interested, but at that price, I might be.

Officially introduced at midnight, the Accuracy International AX308MC and AX338MC. The "MC" stands for Multi Caliber, since a barrel change is easy. It already was on the AXs, but I guess this is easier. They now have the same stock used on AI's PSR. Edit: Looking at the barrel change system, it is a lot faster. I bet you can swap barrels at the bench or in the field in a minute or less using an Allen wrench that stores in the stock. AI also released the replacement for the AE, called the AT. Before I give the price, I need to set it up to bring things into perspective. The AI PSR is $17,000. Their AX is $6-7,000 The AI AW was around $6,200. The AI AE was a little under $4,500. The AI AT has more goodies than the AE or AW and will be around $3,500. It's a steal. Well, in comparison.

Keep us posted. I'm kinda looking for another precision rifle, and while I want a .260 or .308, I see (relatively) good prices on .338 Lapuas now and then. It's tempting...until I start thinking about things like 90-some grains of powder in each $3 case.

Desert Tech (used to be Desert Tactical Arms or DTA) makes some pretty nice bullpup bolt action precision rifles. Now they are going to make bullpup semiauto rifles: http://blog.predatorbdu.com/2014/01/desert-tech-introduces-micro-dynamic.html?m=1

SHOT is two weeks away, but some companies have jumped the gun and shown new models already. KelTec has been showing pics of a .223 bullpup. Or two new .223 bullpups, depending on your point of view. It looks like the same basic action in different clothing. The first one more or less resembles their RFB .308 from four or five years ago. The second one...the second one is...eye-catching. Eye-catching even among the typical odd-looking KelTecs. This is their ad in the current issue of Shooting Industry magazine: See what I mean? That M43 looks like some Soviet prototype from...1943. I guess that's the idea. Remington R-51 pistol: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/01/01/remington-announces-r-51-pistol/ I like the old Remington 51, and would like to have one. This new R-51 has some similarities, both mechanical and physical. And some new revolvers from S&W: http://www.juliegolob.com/new-smith-wesson-revolvers-for-competition-hunting-and-self-defense Mostly variations on current models, and an odd 8-shot 9mm revolver meant for competition.

Thank you, and same to you!

I thought that was the Winchester version of the FN FNAR (which in turn is the FN version of the Browning BAR)? I haven't seen a Winchester SX-AR in person yet, even though they were introduced maybe four years ago (typical).

www.dsgarms.com Most items are 30% off. No code needed, but the sale price won't show until you put it in the cart. Sale runs until midnight the 5th. Among other things, they have US Palm chest rigs with level IIIA armor. With front panel, it's usually $199, now $139.30. That's a deal.

If anyone is interested, I got an email from AIM Surplus today, listing more Swiss rifles. They have the 1896/11 ($279.95) the 1911 ($259.95), and the 1911 carbine ($269.95). http://www.aimsurplus.com/catalog.aspx?groupid=209 GP11 ammo: http://www.aimsurplus.com/product.aspx?i...amp;groupid=738 They have trade-in S&W M&P 40 pistols too, for $379.95.

To be introduced at SHOT. The "most powerful 6.5mm ever". They claim 3400 fps with a 129 grain AccuBond. Same velocity at 400 yards as the .260 Rem at the muzzle. This was passed on to me after being seen on Nosler's facebook page. Speculation is it's based on the .375 Ruger case (.30-06 action length). I have been wanting a .260 Rem since it was the wildcat 6.5-308, and still do (1000 yards and under target shooting). Some of the other 6.5s are interesting, but this one is way beyond any use I have. It should get some more 6.5 match bullets coming from Nosler.

My Jan 2014 issue came today. "Coming next issue: Downrange Dominance- Ruger SR-762"

Some pics: Pistol target dressed: Pistol target undressed. Since the milk jug head fit on top, a center chest hit was actually a low hit and might not take it down. We got lots of reminders to keep shooting until the threat was down. Some teamwork, spotting and calling shots. View from the 500. We were tearing down, and this target caught my eye. It was shot at by three guys. They shot it at 400, 500, and 600 yards from prone/bipod. The 15-rd group measures 12" x 11.5". For three people and three distances, and winds varying from 3 to 17 mph, a 2 moa group impressed me.

A week ago, a friend and I held a bugout rifle match. We were shooting on his family's property in July and said he'd like to do a match there sometime. This place has a bluff that runs from 100-150 feet tall along one side that makes a perfect natural backstop. It's 300 yards across the short way, and we can get 600+ by shooting from the corner. It also joins another property belonging to an IPSC shooter in the family, where they made a pistol bay and 100 yard rifle bay. He talked about a precision match at first, but it quickly evolved into a bugout match. We decided to take advantage of what we had and use it all, and add some close/fast shooting to the longer range shooting. Competitors would have to walk 1-2 miles carrying everything on them, so it made sense to go the bugout route anyway. I was really interested in seeing what people chose to shoot. There is no single rifle that's ideal for all of this type of shooting, so you had to compromise somewhere. Carrying it all over hills, crossing railroad beds, and walking creeks influenced decisions too. We spent three months getting ready, and here is what we came up with: When the competitors arrived, they signed in, and dumped their rifles and gear in a trailer. We couldn't make people bring a pack with shelter and three days of supplies, but we encouraged it to take advantage of the time to test it out. Most did, but a couple just brought ammo and water. One competitor had to walk out of hurricane Andrew, and he used a shoulder slung duffle. We would begin using pistol only, as carried daily. Stage 1: This was handgun only. It was also a blind stage- you couldn't see any of it until you entered past the hung tarps. The situation was the S had HTF, and you had to leave work/shopping/whatever to get to your car where either your rifle was kept or to get home to your rifle. We tried to replicate a parking lot. Barrels represented concrete posts, and snow fence on frames were cars. Five steel targets awaited, hidden throughout. They had shirts, so the steel area and location was concealed. Start at the entrance, get to the exit and if you survived you got your rifle. A "fight your way to he rifle stage". This was untimed, so shooters would use cover and pie corners correctly for a change. Get through this, and you went to... Stage 2: The trailer with everybody's gear was parked by a table. You had to put on all your gear (vest, warbelt, pack, etc) while on the clock. This came from times I've been in carbine classes and I've watched people spend 20 minutes getting their gear on before class each morning. That is fine for an LEO on a raid team, but that's not most people. When asked why they took the class, they almost always say it's to prepare for the sound of breaking glass at 3am. Well, of your plan to respond to bumps in the night is to spend 20 minutes getting cool-guy gear on, it's a bad plan. I truly think some people don't realize how long it takes them to put in what they think they "need". These guys in the match were sorted out, but it was still good to give them a frame of reference. You couldn't cheat and throw a belt with a couple of mag pouches over your shoulder and say "done", because however you left this stage was how you had to shoot the next stage. You went straight to it without a look, so didn't know what you might need. Stage 3: The first actual rifle stage. Another blind stage. You started at the corner of a barn. The scenario was that you were about to start your real walk when you were spotted and shot at by five people. At the signal, you stepped out and dealt with the five (steel targets). We didn't tell them the distance (125-127 yards) or location beyond the general direction. They had five rounds, with the idea that if it took more, you'd be shot by then anyway. There were several ways to do this one. In truth, only one shooter "lived". He turned the corner and dropped immediately. Then he found the targets. Others stood in the open and maneuvered as needed to see them all. Our intent was that you couldn't get all five from one spot. The "survivor" beat us, though. He took the risk of shooting through brush near the targets that obscured two of them. The brush was close enough that any deflection was minimal and he hit them. Good work. Then we started walking. We had to get to the other shooting area. Stage 4: This was the High Angle stage. This was to show the effects of shooting down at a steep angle. We had a choice of steep or distance and compromised. We got 32 degrees of angle and 53 yards distance. We were actually shooting down the face of the bluff that would be the backstop for the long portions. The scenario was you entered a flat-roofed commercial building to climb up for a look around. You were spotted, and people are coming to enter the building and get you. We had a VTAC barricade up there, and a line across it you couldn't go below. Basically it forced a standing position. We wanted a small target to illustrate the angle effects. The target was a scaled down humanish silhouette of about 4.5" square. The ten ring was about an inch. The computer programs show a change of around .1" when shooting at this range and angle. It didn't work that way for anyone. Most shot pretty low and failed to get any decent hits. I used a 50 yard zero setting and didn't try to compensate, just to see how much change it made. I was at least an inch low. This stage was not much liked. But it was educational. Then we did some more walking. We had to cross the soybean field to shoot back toward where we just left. Stage 5: 300 yards. We planned this part to be the easiest of the distance stages. The shooting area was flat, level, and as comfortable as rocks can be. It was an abandoned railroad bed. Target sizes were generous, considering. We wanted everyone to get a good solid zero here to work from as we moved on. What we didn't realize when we started the planning, was that we would get some pretty skilled shooters. Let me take a minute to talk about that. We limited it to eight people, plus us two organizers. We were selective in who we asked. We wanted people with some skills at distance, with a self-defense mindset (that was harder than we thought to find that combination- we knew some of each, but few with both), and we tried to get fairly local people because the date might have to change quickly. We needed the field harvested and had no way to determine when that would be. We got lucky and got some great shooters. We ended up with seven after some last minute cancellations. Three had been to a Thunder Ranch midrange precision rifle class together on the spring. One shoots 1,000 yard F-class. The rest were not slugs either. So with the skills these guys had, we didn't really need to have a "starter" stage for long range. This would not have been much of a challenge, except for the fact we had some of the strongest winds in a while. It was usually running around 17 mph, but varying from 3-22 mph. That made it a little harder, but not enough to really hurt them. The 300 yard targets were steel plates: a 2/3 scale IPSC, 12" round, and 10" round. Stage 6: 400 yards. Three minute time limit. Targets were steel: Three IPSC silhouettes and two 14" squares. We were able to shot from prone in the bean stubble. Most didn't use half the time. Our plan here was to have a plywood wall with a "window" opening. There would be a chair or two, maybe a ladder or something else. The idea was you came across an abandoned house and had to make a position inside it, shoot the steel, and do it under the time limit. We'd hang a tarp here too, to block the view so people wouldn't just copy each other's expedient position. We simply ran out of time to get it done. Stage 7: 500 yards: Same time limit, same targets. Same position. Stage 8: 600 yards. Same thing. I think everyone learned something. The wind got tough for some of us at 400 and beyond. If using a scope with mil-dots or similar, they could manage it fine. Those without anything to mark hold off points had trouble. The equipment choices were varied, as I had hoped. Four used gee-whiz bolt guns with serious scopes. One of those was a 20" barreled rifle, which I thought was perfect. I think all the bolt guns had Nightgorce scopes- 3.5-22X I think. Two used SCAR 17s, one with a 1.5-5X scope and one with a 1-4X. One M1A. He started with a Leupold 1.5-5X but tossed it aside after struggling at 300 with wandering lateral zero. He did great with iron sights after that (old Marine). And one AR, a 20" with a Leupold 1.5-5X. All but the AR were .308. My co-coordinator decided that morning kit to shoot because running it and shooting it was too much. He would have used a Savage .308 with 20" barrel and 6-24X scope. As expected, the handier rifles did better up close, and the big bolt guns better at distance. I was one of the SCAR/1-4X guys. I struggled with wind because I had a triangle reticle with no good reference to hold off. Cranking knobs wouldn't work because the wind varied quicker than dialing. I still wouldn't change anything, since I think it's the most universal problem solver. It was fun. I had trouble walking until Wednesday.

The first test they were 36 grain HP (the Federal) and 40 grain solids (the Eley). I tried this test a few times with other ammo, mostly 40 solids, covering a wider range of quality. At the bottom would be either CCI Blazer or PMC Zapper, and at the high end Eley Club. Generally speaking, but not always, the more accurate the ammo in this rifle, the less change in accuracy was shown. It did always improve with the band removed, just less with its favorites. The POI shift was in the same rough ballpark regardless of ammo- an inch, plus or minus 1/4. I won't be able to test more with this rifle- at least for a while- because it is in another stock.

It seems like I heard or saw that SWAT magazine was going to have a review soon. Hopefully they will run it through a class and get at least 800-1,000 rounds through it in a short period, although they seem to be slipping in that regard.

I'm still waiting on my Ruger XGI. Ruger auctioned off a prototype maybe 18 months ago. I think the money went to the NRA.

Yes, that's the place.

You are welcome. Glad to see another happy Garand owner. The front sight wiggle probably is from play in the gas cylinder-to-barrel interface. The gas cylinder slips over the barrel, and is located radially by three slots in the barrel matching three "keys" in the gas cylinder. The cylinder was meant to be removed for cleaning. Although it's made of stainless steel, the corrosive primed WWII ammunition would still eat away at it. Soldiers may not have pulled it off regularly, but it still got taken off often enough to cause those splines. The Garand rear sight moves .008" for each moa of adjustment, therefore, only .008" of gas cylinder play can cause one moa point of impact change. By the way, that stainless steel construction of the gas cylinder is why they never match the finish of the rest of the rifle. WWII users tried all sorts if ways to darken that gas cylinder because it wore bright and shiny quickly and they believed it served to alert the enemy to their position. The inner diameter of the average Garand gas cylinder is worn almost to, or past, the max limit. Over 70 years of use will do that I suppose. They usually still work just fine though. If not, there are a couple of fixes. One is to have the operating rod piston replaced with an oversize one. The piston is sort of a plug that gets silver soldered into the operating rod tube. Another fix is to have the gas cylinder rebuilt. Used to be, people just replaced as cylinders, but they are getting scarcer and more expensive so now it pays to have them rebuilt. There is a place in OH that does both. Their name escapes me at he moment.

Congratulations. The Garand is my favorite rifle. You can't have too many. They are best bought three at a time so you can stack them, don'tcha know. 1)Parts. I usually get parts from Orion 7. www.m1garandrifle.com Fulton Armory has good stuff too, but their prices are usually the highest too. You get what you pay for, but I think you get the same for less from some places. 2)Best source for maint/cln practices. The best online source for anything Garand is the M1/M14/M1A section of Culver's Shooting Pages. www.jouster.com/forums Some of the top Garand experts in the world post there. Spend a few minutes reading posts there each day, and you will know more than you ever wanted to know about Garands. Second place, the CMP forum. In fact, for basic care, they probably have the edge over CSP. 3) Recommendations on owning shooting? Yes, lots. Anything in particular? In general: Grease is usually better than oil. If empty brass (GI or GI equivalent ammo) is thrown from 1:00 to 2:00 (muzzle being 12:00) it is lubed pretty well. Op rod spring length at rest should be at least 19.00". Flat spots worn on that spring at any point are also an indicator of wear. Keep the rear sight cross pinion and nut tight enough to keep the rear sight from dropping. Most gas cylinders are worn oversize. How much oversize might effect function. It's easier to strip the bolt or replace bolt parts like the extractor or ejector when it's in the rifle than out...assuming you have a combination tool. Get a combination tool. The M3 and M3A1 are preferred by most over the later M10 (the one that makes a cleaning rod handle). Very, very few Garands are "all matching" or "all original". Sometimes people make a mistake by trying to get hem in what they think is original condition. A late rifle may have actually been made with an early safety, for example. And a few hundred more.

Welcome!

First is the obligatory "depends on what you are going to use it for". I agree there is a lot of truth to that. I'd pick a different scope and reticle for benchrest competition than for hunting raccoons at night. However, I think the plain old Duplex would work for most things. With the .22 I shoot most, I have a Duplex. I zero at 50, so out to 50 yards, I hold dead on the crosshair intersection. At 75, I hold up so the target is between there and the point of the bolder part of the crosshairs. At 100, I hold at that point where the bolder section starts. That covers about any .22 shooting I'll do. I'm sure with a MilDot reticle you could learn which dot corresponds with what range, but they may be too far apart and you would still have to hold between points like I do at 75. They would help with estimate range based on size of a target, but I'm not sure how necessary that is with a .22. I am curious about the new 2-7X rimfire scope from Redfield. It comes with an elevation knob marked for the trajectory of .22 LR 36 grain HP ammo. It has a blank knob also, that you can mark. Good thing, because I have doubts the trajectory marks will be just right for all ammo and rifles. The negative I see is that you have to have time to adjust the knob. If you are time limited on the shot, you might not get that adjustment made. I'd rather see some sort of hash marks in the reticle than a marked elevation knob. Vortex has a 2-7X Rimfire scope that I haven't actually liked at yet, but have heard some say it has such a reticle and others say it doesn't. As to how much magnification, I guess that depends too. I have a 4X on the .22 I use most, but I have been considering a 2-7X or 3-9X. The 4X handles 90% of my needs, but I'd like more for that other 10%. I still think 4X is plenty for most rimfire needs, and my second and third most used .22s will keep their red dot and 1.5-5X respectively. I don't think a variable will complicate things too much for an inexperienced shooter. My guess is you will find it stays set around the middle of the magnification range and occasionally turned up to max.

http://ruger.com/products/sr762/index.html

It's roughly half mine and half another guy's, but it was nice to see it all together.

Got some new range equipment.