PDA

View Full Version : Carbine Basics



JDM
02-10-2012, 01:35 AM
Lets get a discussion going about basic carbine knowledge.

For the purposes of this thread, let us assume the end user is a guy like me -- a little rifle experience, but a novice when it comes to the modern defensive carbine. The owner wants to use the rifle for everything carbine related. Specifically, carbine classes, and home defense. Remember, this is a basic thread, so assume no SBRs or Suppressors for now; further assume one rifle for everything. Also, assume we are working with a good quality, correctly assembled gun, like a Colt, or Daniel Defense, etc.

Is there an 'establishing reliability/function' period with a carbine like there is with a pistol (500 FMJs and 200 service rounds)?
A good zero is vital to rifle shooting -- whats the best option for a general use carbine (16 inch, irons/1x red dot), and how do we get there?
I get the idea that less really is more when first learning your rifle, especially coming in as green as I am. I.E. don't hang $2000 worth of modifications on your rifle before you've got the basics down, which is solid, but what does one absolutely need on the rifle to get the most out of it? Sling? Redi-Mag? Light?
DocGKR provides excellent data on duty/defense ammo selection, but what about zero with defense vs. practice ammo? do you set two zeros? Zero for the defensive ammo, and adjust hold during training? Find a training/defense combo with the same POA/POI?
What about optics? Is there still merit to the 'irons first' mantra, or has that given way to the prevalence of the RDS?
Naturally, the above hardly all inclusive, but it is certainly a start. Ask more questions! The long gun knowledge available here is something to be taken advantage of, and I think it is sometimes overlooked.

Kyle Reese
02-10-2012, 03:10 AM
My thoughts in a condensed format, as I've got a plane to Dubai to catch here shortly.


Is there an 'establishing reliability/function' period with a carbine like there is with a pistol (500 FMJs and 200 service rounds)?

FWIW, when I get a new carbine, I generally run 1000 rds of M855 / M193 type ammo thru it to help gauge a baseline of reliability. A carbine from a quality manufacturer (Colt, Noveske, BCM,DD & some others) should be able to do this with little difficulty (assuming it's lubricated properly and you're using quality magazines). You also need to test each magazine you get for the carbine, if you intend to train with it or use it for duty / social purposes. Avoid the temptation to buy bargain basement brands wrt a carbine.


A good zero is vital to rifle shooting -- whats the best option for a general use carbine (16 inch, irons/1x red dot), and how do we get there?

Several schools of thought on this one. Some folks/organizations run/mandate a 300M zero, while others advocate the 50/200M. I keep it simple and have a 100M zero on my carbines. All this means is your POA/POI are the same at 100. Know your holdovers if you opt to utilize this zero, however.


I get the idea that less really is more when first learning your rifle, especially coming in as green as I am. I.E. don't hang $2000 worth of modifications on your rifle before you've got the basics down, which is solid, but what does one absolutely need on the rifle to get the most out of it? Sling? Redi-Mag? Light?

Get a good 2 point sling (Blue Force Gear, VTAC, Ares Armor) and white light (I run a SF X300 on my 6920 at the 12 o'clock position in front of the FSB). Some folks do not like the Redi Mag (or other accessories), so I'd suggest trying one on a friend's carbine (if possible) before purchasing. By "getting the most out of it", it depends on the intended purpose of the carbine. Recreational use? Duty?


DocGKR provides excellent data on duty/defense ammo selection, but what about zero with defense vs. practice ammo? do you set two zeros? Zero for the defensive ammo, and adjust hold during training? Find a training/defense combo with the same POA/POI?

The best way to establish this in your individual weapon is to see how each load prints at _____ distance (depending on your mission parameters). I have my carbines zeroed for M855 (with the exception of my MK 12 SPR).


What about optics? Is there still merit to the 'irons first' mantra, or has that given way to the prevalence of the RDS?

I don't subscribe to the "irons first" school of thought, but you should have your irons properly zeroed in conjunction with your RDS. Lots of shooters fail to do this. They buy Troy folding BUIS because they look cool, and never zero the things. My preferred RDS are the Aimpoint Comp M4 and T1 series.

Sorry for the brevity. Just my 2 cents. Hope it helps.

JDM
02-10-2012, 08:54 AM
It does, very much. Thanks Fred!

And by "get the most out of it" realistically I mean recreation, or training classes. I'm not slinging a rifle, and shooting bad people for a living. Of the most remote possible uses for my rifle, shooting a violent felon is one of them -- like it is with every gun we own -- so that should be taken into small account. That said, this rifle isn't going into the trunk of my patrol car or the like, so we have some wiggle room for trial and error, etc. Also, before I rely on this gun as a home defense weapon, it (I) needs to be wrung out in a class, and proven reliable.

Al T.
02-10-2012, 11:44 AM
Is there an 'establishing reliability/function' period with a carbine like there is with a pistol (500 FMJs and 200 service rounds)?

IME, if you are going to have problems in an AR, they crop up PDQ. As your magazines wear, the first indicator seems to be a double feed (aluminum magazines). Not sure about Pmags, no problems so far. Ammo wise, if you are shooting anything other than ball, shooting 50 rounds or so will tell you what you need to know.



A good zero is vital to rifle shooting -- whats the best option for a general use carbine (16 inch, irons/1x red dot), and how do we get there?

I'm a fan of the 50/200 zero. I cannot see engaging (SD) much past 75 yards based on my situation. Nothing wrong with the 100y zero either. I would avoid the 25m/300m zero as it is more useful to the military and puts your mid-line trajectory rather high.


I get the idea that less really is more when first learning your rifle, especially coming in as green as I am. I.E. don't hang $2000 worth of modifications on your rifle before you've got the basics down, which is solid, but what does one absolutely need on the rifle to get the most out of it? Sling? Redi-Mag? Light?

Sling, RDS and white light (IMHO) will do all that's needed. I like the SureFire G2 in a VTAC mount and an Aimpoint RDS. For my non-duty suburban needs, I'm GTG.


DocGKR provides excellent data on duty/defense ammo selection, but what about zero with defense vs. practice ammo? do you set two zeros? Zero for the defensive ammo, and adjust hold during training? Find a training/defense combo with the same POA/POI?

I've had some significant POI/POA differences with "serious" ammo vrs. "training" ammo. Strongly suspect it relates to velocity as I'm working my way through some PMC Bronze and running a 55 grain Ballistic Tip load for social use. I zero for the serious use ammo and suck up the (known/validated) difference. As far as zeros go, a zero is not locked in cement. As you change lot numbers, brands or even light conditions, a zero can change. Having a consistent way to check your zero is a good thing. I use a 6 inch by 6 inch steel target for a quick verification.


What about optics? Is there still merit to the 'irons first' mantra, or has that given way to the prevalence of the RDS?

I'm a faithful follower of Pat Rogers. In recent months, he is not only advocating RDS only for new shooters, but using a laser in the place of BUIS. I still have a fondness for iron sights, but would probably only train a new AR owner to hit a paper plate consistently at 50y and then move to the RDS. Please note that I have not evaluated a new AR shooters ability to hit that plate, it's just a thought.

One of Pat's mantras is the acronym "MEAL" for the AR.

M is magazines - use good ones and don't marry them.

E is extractors - more of a problem in the past, but having the correct one for the carbine and replacing them at about 5 k corrects this older issue.

A is ammo. Again, not as much of an issue now, but there is a difference between the previously mentioned PMC (low velocity) and a true 5.56 loaded cartridge like MK318. This can be an issue, so test accordingly.

L is lubrication. While always a fertile topic for the mass slaying of electrons, my take is that ARs need to be wet and what you wet them with is less important than actually doing so. FWIW, I like SLIP2000 products, but a can of Mobil One synthetic is a lot more cost efficient.

JHC
02-10-2012, 12:21 PM
I'm not a carbine guru but I will hazard to say that the manual of arms or TTPs etc for running them can vary more IMO than the manual of arms for a pistol. As such, it's a lot easier to perform them jacked up. So getting to a quality class or carefully selecting a quality DVD - I reckon MagPul Dynamics or Kelly McCann's are both good - could be very useful to get off to a good start.

I'll leave the specifics of gear and details of method to SMEs.

I think I've benefited from making the AR carbine my primary hunting rifle and therefore spend a lot of time with them as I generally hunt 25-30 days each season with a lot of movement. It dusted off my old experience in training with them back in the late '70's/'80's and instills an unconscious familiarity with them. And now, I no longer own a bolt gun and my only lever action is a rimfire. All training, target shooting and hunting is with the AR.

Then judiciously selecting gear and competing in 3 gun matches with tactics oriented folks was also very useful.

rob_s
02-10-2012, 01:06 PM
Green Eyes and Black Rifles (http://www.amazon.com/Green-Eyes-Black-Rifles-Warriors/dp/0615166547/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1328897016&sr=8-1) is a great resource for the AR-shooter. Not everyone is going to agree with everything in it, but there is nothing patently silly or stupid in it like you may find elsewhere. It's good information from a well vetted source.

Mike Pannone's book (http://www.amazon.com/AR15-Handbook-Mike-Pannone-Lawrence/dp/0981918042/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1328897117&sr=1-2) is a great companion piece as well.

HCM
02-10-2012, 01:12 PM
I'm a faithful follower of Pat Rogers. In recent months, he is not only advocating RDS only for new shooters, but using a laser in the place of BUIS. I still have a fondness for iron sights, but would probably only train a new AR owner to hit a paper plate consistently at 50y and then move to the RDS. Please note that I have not evaluated a new AR shooters ability to hit that plate, it's just a thought.

One of Pat's mantras is the acronym "MEAL" for the AR.

M is magazines - use good ones and don't marry them.

E is extractors - more of a problem in the past, but having the correct one for the carbine and replacing them at about 5 k corrects this older issue.

A is ammo. Again, not as much of an issue now, but there is a difference between the previously mentioned PMC (low velocity) and a true 5.56 loaded cartridge like MK318. This can be an issue, so test accordingly.

L is lubrication. While always a fertile topic for the mass slaying of electrons, my take is that ARs need to be wet and what you wet them with is less important than actually doing so. FWIW, I like SLIP2000 products, but a can of Mobil One synthetic is a lot more cost efficient.

This.

Pat is about to get a bit more famous: http://www.panteaoproductions.com/products/basic-carbine

A "Mature Audiences" warning may be necessary but you will definitely learn something.....

JDM
02-10-2012, 01:13 PM
Thanks for the book recommendations Rob.

Good stuff in here guys.

rob_s
02-10-2012, 02:03 PM
Just a side note...

M.E.A.L. is from Dean Caputo. I know that Pat rightly gives him credit, so probably best to do the same thing here. They are friends with one another, and I consider both mentors in a variety of ways, so it's not about one vs. the other, just giving proper credit as I know Pat always does.

Jay Cunningham
02-10-2012, 02:13 PM
Lets get a discussion going about basic carbine knowledge.

For the purposes of this thread, let us assume the end user is a guy like me -- a little rifle experience, but a novice when it comes to the modern defensive carbine. The owner wants to use the rifle for everything carbine related. Specifically, carbine classes, and home defense. Remember, this is a basic thread, so assume no SBRs or Suppressors for now; further assume one rifle for everything. Also, assume we are working with a good quality, correctly assembled gun, like a Colt, or Daniel Defense, etc.

Is there an 'establishing reliability/function' period with a carbine like there is with a pistol (500 FMJs and 200 service rounds)?
A good zero is vital to rifle shooting -- whats the best option for a general use carbine (16 inch, irons/1x red dot), and how do we get there?
I get the idea that less really is more when first learning your rifle, especially coming in as green as I am. I.E. don't hang $2000 worth of modifications on your rifle before you've got the basics down, which is solid, but what does one absolutely need on the rifle to get the most out of it? Sling? Redi-Mag? Light?
DocGKR provides excellent data on duty/defense ammo selection, but what about zero with defense vs. practice ammo? do you set two zeros? Zero for the defensive ammo, and adjust hold during training? Find a training/defense combo with the same POA/POI?
What about optics? Is there still merit to the 'irons first' mantra, or has that given way to the prevalence of the RDS?
Naturally, the above hardly all inclusive, but it is certainly a start. Ask more questions! The long gun knowledge available here is something to be taken advantage of, and I think it is sometimes overlooked.


I'll give you my non-BTDT opinion. I have been training pretty seriously with carbines since 2006, so I think I have some useful insight - of course it's my perspective. You're going to get a lot of overlap on opinions, and then you're going to see pretty clear divergence.


I don't know about an "established" round count for reliability. 500 rounds is pretty common to "bet your life on" but you get guys who will say 1000. However, you also get the "I'm going to out-mindset you" guys who want to make sure that you know how super-serious they are and tell you that they need 2500 minimum or whatever. For me 500 is good. If I get a new AR or help someone shake out their new AR, I usually load one round then shoot. Then I load two rounds and shoot. Then I load three rounds and shoot. If the gun didn't go full auto or blow up and the BCG locked back each time, I then usually dump a few 30 rounds magazines through the gun to GET IT HOT. Usually a lot of smoke comes from the innards of the gun and crap gets burned off. I'll let it cool down and then proceed with rough zeroing if all is well.

I zero my iron sights and my optics for 100 yards. From the prone position at 25 yards, I look to hit about 1.5" lower than my point of aim. This will get me in the ballpark for a rough zero. Then it's prone shooting at 100 yards, POA = POI. You can't get this wrong, no other zeros or maximum ordinals or whatever the hell are out there, so it's pretty idiot-proof. That's about it. Check your co-witness and make sure your dot is sitting on the tip of your front sight.

What do you NEED in the beginning to get the most out of your rifle? Well, good magazines and decent quality ammo. And lube. You can get really up to speed with just a stock iron-sighted rifle. But the first thing you will find that you "need" is going to be a better sling system that the carry strap that comes in the box.

I don't get wrapped up in tweaking zeroes between different weight bullets. The way I look at it is: 55 gr and 62 gr will not change very much out to 100. You can notice the difference at 200, but you can still hit a reduced steel torso center mass no problem. I have no issues zeroing with 55 gr at 100 but using 75 gr TAP in my HD gun, because at 15 or 25 yards the zero shift will hardly matter. I am not going to be shooting someone at 200 yards. And even if for some insane reason I would need to, I can just grab a mag of 55 gr. I keep my 75 gr in 20 rounds mags and my 55 gr in 30 round mags.

I think it's easier to learn on a red dot like an Aimpoint first. But I also think it's important to learn and use and be able to hit with the irons. I have been able to outshoot numerous high-speed types with irons because they wound up using the red dot as a crutch. I am not saying you need to "master" the irons, but for goodness sakes actually zero them and actally shoot with them instead of just slapping them on your gun only so some other basement-dweller doesn't accuse you of "not having BUIS on your rig, bro".

jmjames
02-10-2012, 02:23 PM
I'm a faithful follower of Pat Rogers. In recent months, he is not only advocating RDS only for new shooters, but using a laser in the place of BUIS. I still have a fondness for iron sights, but would probably only train a new AR owner to hit a paper plate consistently at 50y and then move to the RDS. Please note that I have not evaluated a new AR shooters ability to hit that plate, it's just a thought.

When we got together a few weeks ago, it was my first time touching an AR since a few hours out at Fort Dix when I was a kid in AFJROTC, and my first time ever with an RDS, I thought it was pretty easy to knock the 6" plate with your setup.

I was thinking that RDS + laser was the way to go too (not by experience or learning, just gut feeling); the value of a laser is well established, ditto for RDS. Indeed, irons for an AR are the same price as a laser...

J.Ja

HCM
02-10-2012, 02:38 PM
Problems with a quality carbine should be evident quickly but some may not show up till you run the gun hard.

We run the 100 yard zero at work but I prefer the 50/200 zero for personal use. Zero can change and needs to be checked periodically. Loc-tite and witness marks are a necessity for anything with screws, they loosen up easily on the rifle. I learned that one the hard way when my back up sight hit the dirt during a class..

I've been using the Brownells GI mags with Mag-Pul followers in my personal guns since 2007 with good results. We use a mix of Colt GI and PMAGS at work. We recommend 28 rounds in the GI mags 30 in the PMAGS.

Less is more. A 2 point Sling, RDS and white light are the basics.

Slings - I've had good results with both the VTAC and BlueForce Vickers slings. We finally replaced our ghetto fabulous 3 points with padded VTACS at work.

RDS - Aimpoint - based on relaibility and battery life. The Aimpoint Pro is the best deal going right now: http://www.laruetactical.com/aimpoint-pro-patrol-rifle-optic-w-mount

We've run Eo-tech 512's (AA battery) at work for several years now. In my exeperience the Eo-tech cirle /dot reticle offers some advantages but they aren't worth the trouble given the battery life and reliability issues..... Despite the great opportunities this presents to practice with iron sights ....Aimpoints are on my wish list for work...

There are many white light options if you are running a rail but there are two other options worth considering: The Impact Weapons light mounts for the MagPul MOE handguards and the standard M-4 handguards such as the TMC (Top Mount Cantilevered) 1" LIGHT MOUNT-N-SLOT. http://www.impactweaponscomponents.com/category/mount-n-slot/light-mount/ I like the Surefire G2 LED for this but a pistol light on the TMC 1913 Picatinny Light MOUNT-N-SLOT or Mag-Pul MOE light mount will work as well.

The Mag-Pul trigger guard is a "nice to have" if you aren't wearing gloves as the little gap at the junction of the GI trigger guard and pistol grip can wear on your"social" finger.

Al T.
02-10-2012, 02:56 PM
M.E.A.L. is from Dean Caputo.

Rob, thanks for the correction. It's appreciated. :)

J.Ja, yeah. You were gonging that target off hand very nicely. IMHO, that's the beauty of the RDS. Place dot on target, press trigger, rinse, repeat.

Still haven't read anything I'd argue about. :)

One thing we have not discussed is cleaning. When I was first introduced to the AR (M16E1 made by GM-HydraMatic) we had stupid time filling processes to clean the silly things. We boiled the bolts in soapy water, we rinsed the uppers and lowers in immersion heaters, dunked them in diesel fuel, painstakingly scraped the carbon off the bolt tail, used Brasso to clean the bores, took knotted up 550 cord to increase the shine and more crap I've blissfully forgotten.

It was all stupid, stupid, stupid. Did I mention it was stupid? :p

For a garden variety AR (especially with a chrome bore), it's maybe ten minutes to clean. Run a couple of dripping wet patches down the bore, strip and wipe down the bolt and bolt carrier, take a few Q-Tips to the lower receiver, same to the upper, dry patch the bore, re-lube and re-assemble. Personally, I like non-chlorinated brake cleaner, some RKIs don't. It works very well to clean the bolt locking lug recess in the chamber.

JDM
02-10-2012, 02:56 PM
I have an EoTech 512 in the bottom of a box somewhere. I think I want to shoot irons only before I sell that off for an Aimpoint.

Oh and one thing I won't be doing is over cleaning things. I have this amazing talent called "lazy" that keeps me out of messes like that.

Jay Cunningham
02-10-2012, 02:59 PM
Just lube it and it will be fine.

Dropkick
02-10-2012, 03:38 PM
From one carbine noob to another, I went through the same deal about a year ago. Through the process I learned:

-Have a couple stacks of mags that you know work. For me it is USGI with Magpul-ish Anti-tilt followers.
-A good sling for your rifle is the equivalent of a good holster for your pistol.
-Attach a good white light. If your primary use will be indoors, something that isn't so bright it white washes everything. If it's outdoors, find something that can really throw a beam. If you're lucky you can find something that is adjustable.
-I use irons for accurate shots, and a cowitnessed RDS for quick shots. Your preference may vary.
-I BFZ'ed the irons, and then dialed the RDS in for the absolute cowit.
-Everything is setup for the abundance of reliable practice ammo I have. With several 30 round mags, I have no problems despensing it out the barrel generously.
-Buy a StripLULA, it's the best tool out there for loading mags from both loose ammo, and ammo on stripper clips.
-Learn to work the charging handle with your left hand while it's in your shoulder and on target. Dropping it to low ready is a sloppy habit to get into. (Unless you're locking the bolt back manually without a mag.)

So, not much different from what other guys have said.

JHC
02-10-2012, 03:51 PM
-I use irons for accurate shots, and a cowitnessed RDS for quick shots. Your preference may vary.
.

I have a N4 Recce set up for hunting (1-4x) and BCM lightweight (irons) for action stuff. I've tried and tried to like T-1's and have tried a couple on my son's rifles and Aimpoint dots are not dots to my eyes. They are LONG slashes of red. Easily 12 moa across at 100 yards. I can't group with those for squat at 50 or 100. So I run the lightweight with irons and a white light for the time being. For whatever technical and optical reason, EOTech center dots look fine to my eyes.
These are both mid-length guns so with that little bit more sight radius, the irons hit very well at 100 and pretty well at 200. The superiority of the RDS in general is undeniable. Just not Aimpoints with my vision.

HCM
02-10-2012, 03:53 PM
I have an EoTech 512 in the bottom of a box somewhere. I think I want to shoot irons only before I sell that off for an Aimpoint.

Oh and one thing I won't be doing is over cleaning things. I have this amazing talent called "lazy" that keeps me out of messes like that.

Re the 512, as much as I like Aimpoint, you can't beat free. If you try it, mount it with the small hex screw (as opposed to the big thumb screw)and some blue loc-tite. Lithium AA's will help with battery life.

One of the big 512 issues is the spring cups in the battery box coming loose and falling out. The best soloution I've seen is found here: http://www.kyledefoor.com/2009/12/mounting-tips-and-eotech-secret.html

If you keep the 512, I recommend a spare battery box and a Larue mount.

The reticle is the EO-tech is one of it's strengths. The 1 MOA center dot is precise and the 6 o'clock has mark mark of the 65 MOA ring can be used as a POA/POI sight at 7 yards to compensate for off-set. ( Work gun, 100 yard zero, Federal 62 gr. soft point)

JAD
02-10-2012, 03:57 PM
I'll toss in a recommendation for Jim Crews' "Some of the Answer" book on the carbine.

HCM
02-10-2012, 04:20 PM
--A good sling for your rifle is the equivalent of a good holster for your pistol.
-Learn to work the charging handle with your left hand while it's in your shoulder and on target. Dropping it to low ready is a sloppy habit to get into. (Unless you're locking the bolt back manually without a mag.)



These are excellent points. I would add avoiding the magwell hold.

WDW
02-10-2012, 11:20 PM
I am no expert in the carbine field by any means, but I have used on in combat before and here area few points that I swear by.
-The bolt needs to be wet
-Zero irons to same POA/POI as your RDS and buy a quality RDS and irons. I like a 300yd zero, it is easy to wing it for shorter/longer distances. (EOtech or Aimpoint) If you buy a Barska or Tasco you are doing it wrong
-Use P-mags. The feed lips break before they bend. They either work 100% or not at all. With metal mags, the lips can bend, they may work, they may not, it is hard to tell by looking at them. With a P-mag, a quick look can determine seviceability
-A quality sling makes all the difference. But if it says blackhawk on it you are doing it wrong
-Trigger control is vital for success. You will be amazed at the speed and accuracy, even with a less than perfect sight alignment/picture, you can get with excellent trigger control.
-and for goodness sake, do not hang $10k in gay accessories off the damn thing. BUIS, RDS, rail, maybe a forward grip, and maybe a light and that is it (please no bayonet)
-Oh, and if your rifle says bushmaster or DPMS you are doing it wrong

Odin Bravo One
02-11-2012, 08:54 AM
PM Sent.

JDM
02-11-2012, 12:44 PM
Quite a few mentions of the VTAC and BFG sling.

Single points are inferior to two points?

rob_s
02-11-2012, 12:55 PM
Quite a few mentions of the VTAC and BFG sling.

Single points are inferior to two points?

Opinions vary, but broadly "yes". The theory is that a two-point can do everything a single-point can, but can also do more. I don't find that to be exactly 100% correct, but it's close.

However, I have rigged up two BFG VCAS slings to work as one-to-two-point (after trying the Magpul MS2 and finding it sorely lacking) and I think this is the best setup I've found for a relatively short, lightweight, gun. As the gun gets heavier, the usefulness of the single-point option gets reduced, and I use a padded VCAS un-modified.

I recently got to use a Sheriff of Baghdad Sling from Mission Ready Equipment and love the simplicity and the way it adjusts. If they get to a padded version with QD connections at each end I would really like to try that. I'd also like to try the Magpul MS3 as it appears at first glance to have corrected some of the problems with the MS2.

Jay Cunningham
02-11-2012, 01:12 PM
Quite a few mentions of the VTAC and BFG sling.

Single points are inferior to two points?

Well, it depends of course. I know guys who are in SWAT units and who have conducted "assaulter" operations where they had short guns and rode or flew to the place where they had to go into and then fight inside. A lot of these guys swear by single points, and I can clearly understand why.

So figure out what purpose the sling would be serving on your carbine to support your "mission".

joshs
02-11-2012, 01:15 PM
Quite a few mentions of the VTAC and BFG sling.

Single points are inferior to two points?

I prefer a two-point with the rear point on the rear outside of the stock and the front point all the way forward on the inside of the handguard. This setup keeps the sling out of my way and provides the most stability when slung. I like the VTAC because it provides the most amount of adjustment. I leave the sling slack enough to shoot from my left shoulder without having to adjust the sling or drop an arm out of the loop.

Odin Bravo One
02-11-2012, 01:31 PM
Single Point sling has it's place.

For most folks, that place is in the catalog, and not on their carbine



A single point is far less versatile compared to a quality 2 point sling. Some may not need or want versatile and a single point might be the answer. For those who do want versatile, I'd suggest passing on the single point.

Suvorov
02-11-2012, 04:00 PM
I recently got to use a Sheriff of Baghdad Sling from Mission Ready Equipment and love the simplicity and the way it adjusts. If they get to a padded version with QD connections at each end I would really like to try that. I'd also like to try the Magpul MS3 as it appears at first glance to have corrected some of the problems with the MS2.

How dose the SOB sling compare to the VTAC. Given both "designers" came from the same unit and they are both 2-point slings it would seem that the differences would be minor. From just looking, the SOB seems a little "simpler"?

Regarding the OP question about slings, there isn't anything I can add to Sean and Rob's expert opinions other than say I'm currently quite happy with my VTAC slings. They are simple to use and adapt to a wide variety of mounting options. They allow me to use them as shooting slings by putting tension on the rifle as well as use them as a CQB sling for pistol transitions to making a nice "carrying strap" across my back.

rob_s
02-11-2012, 04:24 PM
SOB adjusts the reverse of the VTAC, if that makes sense. you pull the tail towards your body, instead of away from your body, to tighten it. I find the SOB more intuitive and easier to work with.

Odin Bravo One
02-11-2012, 06:30 PM
For more info specific to carbine equipment, etc., Rob S. has had the opportunity to T&E a lot of the more recent gadgets, gizmo's, dohickey's, add-ons, as well as quality accessories that are out there. I may not agree with every conclusion he has come to, but he is a wealth of information when it comes to the shit people hang off their guns. He also took the time some while ago to document who is making what, to what standard which has been published in the glossy picture magazines, reproduced by quality trainers, and referenced numerous times by me when pointing out pro's and con's to spending a large amount of money on a defensive carbine.

Worth picking his brain on the topic if you have specific questions about specific equipment.

Al T.
02-11-2012, 07:37 PM
^ What he said. :)

As far as single point slings, if you are in a place where retention is an issue (aircraft, boats) I can see it. Otherwise, I'd rather not be strapped to the long gun.

Mission drives the gear train. Or so I hear. ;)

Failure2Stop
02-11-2012, 08:51 PM
Break-In
I like to run about 500 trouble-fee (not counting magazine issues) rounds through my ARs before considering them good to go.
The gun will also feel better (wear in) after 500 to 1,000 rounds than it does fresh out of the box.
I would only run NATO pressure rounds for that time, and then switch over to Wolf/Tula/steel-whatever after that.

Zeroing
I prefer a 100 meter zero for all optics. I have tried all of the major zeroing schemes, and the 100 meter gives me the most commonality between optics and makes short-range hold-over much simpler out to 175 meters.
For my HD gun, I zero with my HD ammo (which is currently 75gr TAP, but will probably change shortly) and then see how much shift I have at 50 m and in (which is usually not much)
For my teaching/GP gun, I zero with my primary use ammo (currently IMI M193). If worse comes to worse, I can get a lot of work done with M193 out of a properly zeroed carbine.

Zeroing is absolutely, positively, totally critical to use of the carbine.
It is also completely over-simplified by most.
It's a lot more than just how many rounds you fire and how far you choose to walk from the target.
The really fancy, neat-o whiz-bang 25 yard/meter targets are a waste of effort. There's no need whatsoever to require different target types at different ranges to get zeroed. I only use two different targets, one for irons and RDSs and one for zeroing cross-hair optics.
Make sure you know your adjustments. Write it down, plug it into your phone, carve it into your stock, whatever, but staring at holes in a target trying to figure out how many clicks equals what from a given range is a tremendous waste of time.

I'm going to give my complete zeroing procedure and why:

1st, zero your BUIS without any optics on the gun.
I prefer to zero my irons at 50 meters, or at 200 m if I have the distance available. Why? It's easier to see your target/intended POI (point of impact) if you are holding below that point with your front sight at 150 to 200 m, otherwise your front sight will be obscuring most of your target at longer range.
Why no optics? POI can shift when looking through the optic, and if I have to ditch my optic, I want that zero to be true.

I start at 25 m.
Point of aim (POA) will always be the center of the zeroing target. I use a normal B8 or a 6" gridded black circle anymore for irons and dot-optics.
http://www.gamecalls.net/free_stuff/targets/Huge%20Circle%20on%20Grid.pdf
Shoot 3 shot groups from a good magazine-monopod prone position. Why only 3 shots? You want to get off the 25 as soon as possible. 10 shots should be more than enough.
Adjust your sights to hit about 1.5 inches low. Write your adjustments on the zeroing target, it makes tracking adjustments and groups much easier. POI should actually be a little less than 1.5 inches low, but it'll be good enough to get close at your longer ranges. Like I said before, get off the 25 as fast as you can, if you are adjusting less than 4 clicks to get centered and 1.5 low, you should be walking back, not wasting bullets.

Once you are 1.5 low and centered, put up a new zeroing target and move back to 50 m. If you are daring and able, you can skip the 50 and go right to 100 m, but I really recommend at least shooting one group from 50 before moving back.
At 50, fire 5 round groups.
Adjust your sights to establish POA/POI correspondence.
This is the time to be finicky about deflection.

Move back to 100 m.
Fire 5 round groups.
POI should be approx 2" high and centered.
Be aware of wind at this point, as a 10 mph full value wind can push POI about 1.5 inches, and we want our zero to be free of wind effect.
Once you think you are good, put up a new target and fire a 5 round group.
Mark it so it can easily be distinguished from following shots, because it's about to get involved.
Move back to 100 m.
Fire (4) 5 round groups. Between each group, stand up, move around, and re-assume a magazine-monopod prone position, being acutely aware of reestablishing natural point of aim.
Make final sight tweaks and repeat as necessary on a fresh target.
Once your are happy, flip up your large aperture and fire a 5 round group to identify possible zero shift and to appreciate sight alignment issues with the large aperture.

Once your BUIS is zeroed, put up 2 targets and mount your RDS (if using an optic that does not permit cowitnessing, skip this step).
Ensuring that the dot is completely off and fire a 5-round group from 100 m with the small aperture on one target and another 5-round group on the other target with the large aperture.
Note any shift that the optic has induced in your zero.

RDS (omit if using a non-cowitnessable optic) with the dot on and irons up:
Adjust your dot so it is centered and bisected by your front sight tip when looking through the BUIS (remember that the dot will move in the opposite direction as indicated by the adjustment turrets).
Lower the dot intensity so it can just be seen on the target.

Now, zero your primary optic with basically the same procedure:
25 m fast
100 m precisely POI/POA (not 2" high as with irons) being aware of possible wind effect.
100 m (4) 5-round groups for verification.

Setup
If your carbine is to be more than just a range toy, it really needs to be equipped with a few things:

Fixed front sight. If your RDS goes down, you will be severely limited in your precision capability if you don't at least have a front sight to work with. A standard pinned FSB is really the most secure option.

Visible light. I prefer SureFire lights, specifically the M600 or M300 at 10:30 or 1:30. They are robust and lightweight with a good form-factor and good mounting options. They are, however, a bit expensive. I like a 12:00 mounted X300 as well, but I have had a few light NDs due to the switchology. I prefer the protected clickie tail of the M600. The G2 is also a decent light, a protected tail can be added, and there are plenty of mounting options.

Sling. I prefer a good 2-point over all other options. Single point slings lack stability when hands-free unless you have some kind of retention device, and cannot be used as a marksmanship aid. 3-point slings are just a tangled mess, and shoulder transitions suck with them. I have my VCAS attached fully forward on the rail and on the "outside" of the stock (right side for righties, left side for lefties). This prevents the sling from interfering with cheek-weld, as well as permitting shoulder transitions without getting choked-out. Having the sling fully forward on the HG allows it to be used for stability enhancement as a hasty "Hasty Sling" (not a typo). I adjust the sling so that when fully run out it will permit shoulder transitions. Having it set up that way lets me tighten it down enough to be unobtrusive when I need the gun out of my way for two-handed tasks.

I have seen no proof that one must "master" irons before graduating to optics. Both need to be understood and able to be employed. If you cannot afford a good optic, it's better to just stay with irons until you can. Learning on irons will not hamper your ability to use a good RDS later, but if you have the scratch, a good RDS will bring capabilities to the application of the carbine that are superior to irons alone. I think that a good 1-4x/1-6x optic really brings out the highest performance of a general purpose carbine, but they are not cheap, and come at a weight expense.

Lubrication. A huge waste of time in arguing about. Whatever you use, just use it. Some will make clean-up easier, some will stick around longer than others. I prefer to use non-toxic options such as FrogLube and WeaponShield. It just needs to be put on and present if you expect it to work for more than a few hundred rounds.

Shooting
There is more to mastering the carbine than just 50m and under "CQB" type shooting. One should absolutely learn how to shoot well from a standing/SOM position, but also learn how to shoot well from the prone, kneeling, and supported/barricade positions out to 300 meters.
Learning how to call wind and estimate range in conjunction with long-range (500 m+) precision is not really a necessity, but it is worth learning if you want to really get the most out of your setup.

Other Stuff
Vertical Fore Grip. A VFG can be used for more than just as a place to put your hand. They are very useful when shooting off of barricades, especially one-handed. They provide an instant reference point for access to your lights/lasers. They provide a gripping point for when you abuse your carbine for tasks such as busting out vehicle windows. You can wrap your sling around it to further stabilize it when hands-free. You can throw small tools, batteries, or an extra bolt in it.

Rail Covers. They do a lot to dampen heat during high-roundcount shooting. They also protect the rail from damage when shooting from a barricade or just general wear and tear. They improve grip without feeling like a cheese-grater, as bare rails do without gloves. My favorite solutions so far are the LaRue clip things and the old-school KAC panels. I stipple them for more grip and to deaden glare. I grind down the KAX panels first to make them as slim as possible.

Pistol Grips. I hate the finger bump on the A2 grip. I used a bunch of different aftermarket grips in an effort to find the "perfect" grip. I have finally realized that if you just take the A2 grip, grind off that offensive little bump as well as the side-checkering and backstrap grooves, and stipple it, it works great.

Selector Switches. The stock one works ok if you are a rightie. Personally though, I prefer the BAD 45 degree throw selector. I like to ride the safety with my firing thumb, and it makes it more comfortable. It also doesn't run into the trigger finger when swept to fire as "normal" ambi-selectors do.

Triggers: Fancy 2-stage triggers have gained a lot of momentum recently. Be aware of what they are. The stock trigger is the most robust, most dependable trigger. It isn't the lightest or smoothest, but if you master the stock trigger and then move to a 2-stage of whatever flavor later, you will get a lot more out of it and really know exactly what that new trigger does and does not do for your performance.

Gas Systems: Midlength gas systems have a massive following. There are good reasons to go with one but when it comes down to it the amount of data, replacement parts, and standardization heavily favors the plain-jane carbine length gas system. The best reason to go with a middie in my opinion is to be able to have more HG length and a longer sight radius with a fixed FSB.

Recoil Systems: Rifle length recoil systems work the best regardless of barrel length. Carbine length recoil systems require tweaking with any barrel length to ensure consistent reliable performance across the ammunition spectrum with any barrel length. The A5 system works very well, and smooths out recoil nicely, as well as allowing the stock to be extended even further than a standard CAR receiver extension (buffer tube).

Flash Hiders/Muzzle Breaks: The standard A2 does a very good job across the spectrum, and is inexpensive. The Battle Comp is a great combo FH/MB, and I can tell a positive difference when I shoot one, but it does present flash and more concussive force than the A2. The blast/concussion is not a huge deal, but it is present. If getting a little more recoil dampening outweighs the side-effects of a comp for you, rock on, it's good. The Vortex type do a good job of killing flash, but have some lateral blast that can stir up the ground, and they have a little of a "twing" when shot.

Magazines: PMags caught on with a quickness when everyone was told how inferior their GI Aluminum mags were in comparison to $80 HK mags. PMags work when they work (there are a lot more failing and breaking now that more people are using them seriously). The black ones seem to work the best. Standard GI mags are decent with a follower upgrade (I use the MagPul flavor). Track magazine failures, and do not count on those that have failed twice or more.

Suvorov
02-11-2012, 09:58 PM
Break-In

Shooting
There is more to mastering the carbine than just 50m and under "CQB" type shooting. One should absolutely learn how to shoot well from a standing/SOM position, but also learn how to shoot well from the prone, kneeling, and supported/barricade positions out to 300 meters.
Learning how to call wind and estimate range in conjunction with long-range (500 m+) precision is not really a necessity, but it is worth learning if you want to really get the most out of your setup.



This brings up maybe the only other thing of value that I can add to this discussion. From my experience, 99% of carbine (or whatever other term you want to call evil black rifles with long magazines) owners never get off the bench. From where I sit as a RSO, it is a rare occasion I ever see anyone practice shooting from various positions. They will show up with all the wiz bang lights, slings, forward grips, HSLD buttstocks, $200 compensator, and optics, and then proceed to shoot from the bench all day. In the end they brag about their group sizes and then go home thinking they could have single handedly turned the tide at the Battle of the Black Sea. It is nothing more than masturbation with a gun - it may feel good, but it accomplishes nothing. Pistol shooting by nature does not lend itself to this kind of shooting, but when you throw a rifle into the equation it is time to sit down and make tiny little groups and then people spend unGodly amounts chasing this feat.

What I'm trying to say is resist the urge to be a bench shooter once you get a carbine. As the accomplished man above said, learn to shoot your rifle well from the 7 yard line out to the 500 yard line and beyond. This is where your emphasis should be and the shooter with a lowly iron sighted DPMS who actually uses it will be far more accomplished than the "bench shooter" with his $3000 Holy Avenger blessed by Larry Vickers himself.

Get yourself a good quality basic carbine, equip it minimally as talked about here, and then train with it the way you train with your pistol.

JDM
02-11-2012, 10:03 PM
Get yourself a good quality basic carbine, equip it minimally as talked about here, and then train with it the way you train with your pistol.

Precisely​ what my intentions are.

F2S, Thanks for the detailed information.

This thread is turning into exactly what I hoped it would. Thanks to all that have contributed.

orionz06
02-11-2012, 10:05 PM
I really dig the 100 yard zero after thinking the 50/~225 was it. Most any range has a fixed 100 yard target line, you can shoot CMP with it and not change, and most everything just works with 100.

My casual opinion would be to use a 100 yard zero until you can prove something is better for you.

rob_s
02-12-2012, 07:47 AM
For more info specific to carbine equipment, etc., Rob S. has had the opportunity to T&E a lot of the more recent gadgets, gizmo's, dohickey's, add-ons, as well as quality accessories that are out there. I may not agree with every conclusion he has come to, but he is a wealth of information when it comes to the shit people hang off their guns. He also took the time some while ago to document who is making what, to what standard which has been published in the glossy picture magazines, reproduced by quality trainers, and referenced numerous times by me when pointing out pro's and con's to spending a large amount of money on a defensive carbine.

Worth picking his brain on the topic if you have specific questions about specific equipment.

Thank you for the... compliment? I think? :D

Playing in the shallow end of the pool does seem to expose one to all manner of widgets and gizmos. Some people would be AMAZED what I've seen at our matches and drills over the years.

Which brings me to another thing... you can't fix bad gear, so take it easy, add/change a piece at a time, and only after you've identified a shortcoming in what you have, or have gotten time on a widget on someone else's carbine and found something that works better for you.

The two guns in this article (https://sites.google.com/site/tacticalyellowvisor/projects---guns/a-tale-of-two-carbines) have changed very little, and very slowly over the 4.5 years since I wrote it. Most notably the 16" went to this configuration (https://sites.google.com/site/tacticalyellowvisor/projects---guns/back-in-black) a year later and other than updating the light has changed very, very little since. This is because I have had the opportunity to try a lot of stuff on T&E guns to satisfy my curiosity as well as observe a LOT of other shooters since then as they try to make their purchases work for them. I often ask these shooters why they changed to this or that part and usually get either "it got good reviews on the internet" or "I'm not sure".

If you absolutely must tinker, I strongly suggest having a tinkering gun. Keep it as close as you can to your "serious use gun" save whatever one part you're evaluating. You can then even take both to the range to run against one another to evaluate the part. Just like a lot of guys have a carry pistol and a training pistol that match, you can do the same with the carbine and use your training gun as your tinkering gun. I strongly suggest doing this ONLY after you've gained some level of proficiency with the basic gun so that you are better able to objectively evaluate the part in question. If not, you "don't know what you don't know" and it's hard to evaluate a part in that cloud.

rob_s
02-12-2012, 07:51 AM
This brings up maybe the only other thing of value that I can add to this discussion. From my experience, 99% of carbine (or whatever other term you want to call evil black rifles with long magazines) owners never get off the bench. From where I sit as a RSO, it is a rare occasion I ever see anyone practice shooting from various positions. They will show up with all the wiz bang lights, slings, forward grips, HSLD buttstocks, $200 compensator, and optics, and then proceed to shoot from the bench all day. In the end they brag about their group sizes and then go home thinking they could have single handedly turned the tide at the Battle of the Black Sea. It is nothing more than masturbation with a gun - it may feel good, but it accomplishes nothing. Pistol shooting by nature does not lend itself to this kind of shooting, but when you throw a rifle into the equation it is time to sit down and make tiny little groups and then people spend unGodly amounts chasing this feat.

What I'm trying to say is resist the urge to be a bench shooter once you get a carbine. As the accomplished man above said, learn to shoot your rifle well from the 7 yard line out to the 500 yard line and beyond. This is where your emphasis should be and the shooter with a lowly iron sighted DPMS who actually uses it will be far more accomplished than the "bench shooter" with his $3000 Holy Avenger blessed by Larry Vickers himself.

I strongly believe that it is this segment that is causing the trigger-mania we're seeing on various forums and such. While I've never blamed a trigger for a missed shot, I *have* longed for a lighter one after a tedious day at the bench fighting boredom and shooting for groups for an article. It dawned on me one day while doing this that "ah! THIS is why the trigger fanatics are going on and on about them!" I have never noticed a trigger in a training class or match where my focus is on a greater task at hand, but have gotten finger fatigue sitting at a bench focusing on little else but the trigger. I took this to be a clue.

JDM
02-19-2012, 01:20 AM
I've got 400 rounds of XM193 through my DD M4 as of this evening and I have some observations, and questions.

Observations:

The build quality of a Mil Spec rifle is readily apparent. Simple field stripping, and finger banging of this rifle allows one to realize how very different a Daniel Defense product is from a Bushmaster/DPMS/ETC.
It is easier to deliver effective hits on a target with a rifle than a pistol (DUH)
The A2 pistol grip sucks. I took rob_s' advice, and gave it an honest go, but dammit if that chunk of plastic sticking out of the exact place where it isn't supposed to isn't the worst thing ever. I even hacksawed off the offending bump, and added grip tape to the A2 grip, and it was still rubbish; only now it was way to skinny for my hands. I sprung for a MOE grip (which I had to apply a round file to to make the mounting hole in the grip align with the hole in the rifle...meh).
I purchased a padded VTAC MK2 sling for this rifle after numerous SME recommendations, and while I like it, I think I need a forward QD swivel mount, as I cannot snug the sling to my body using the current DD QD sling swivel mount that is near the barrel nut; the sling is way to long even at its shortest length to be properly adjusted for me.
Questions:

I currently have a TLR-1s mounted at 12:00. I really like the TLR-1 series when applied to pistols, but I am curious about how they fare when used on Rifles.
I can see a good amount of the TLR-1s in front of the FSB, (and even a bit in front of the front sight post itself) -- is this a problem? The sight picture is not upset in any way, but one can definitely see the light. (see photos below)
I'm primarily going to be practicing with XM193, is there a good (read DocGKR recommended) SD load that has an interchangeable or very similar zero to this load? M855 is also a viable practice default, so SD loads with a similar zero to M855 are welcome too.
Who wants to go rabbit hunting?
TLR photos:
http://i1192.photobucket.com/albums/aa334/fatcook/IMG_1458.jpg
http://i1192.photobucket.com/albums/aa334/fatcook/IMG_1455.jpg
Thanks again to all the participants in this thread!

SamuelBLong
02-19-2012, 01:42 AM
I havent had any issues running the TLR-1 on my DDM4. It does occlude the bottom of the post, but as long as you can see the top of the post thats all you need.

Currently I've been keeping my gun zeroed and go-time mags loaded up w/ Mk318 Mod 0. For me, M855 shoots close enough to use for practice without making adjustments. Its not a dead on match, but its very very close.

I'm ready to shoot anytime you are.

JDM
02-19-2012, 01:48 AM
I havent had any issues running the TLR-1 on my DDM4. It does occlude the bottom of the post, but as long as you can see the top of the post thats all you need.

Currently I've been keeping my gun zeroed and go-time mags loaded up w/ Mk318 Mod 0. For me, M855 shoots close enough to use for practice without making adjustments. Its not a dead on match, but its very very close.

I'm ready to shoot anytime you are.


Hows the hand?

PM me your number please. I'm a bad person, and I've never gotten it from you.

SamuelBLong
02-19-2012, 02:34 AM
Hows the hand?

PM me your number please. I'm a bad person, and I've never gotten it from you.

Better... Little bit of rest, ice, NSAIDs and stretching does the trick.

Don't feel bad man... that goes both ways... should have exchanged info a while back.

I'll PM you now.

Little Creek
02-19-2012, 06:43 AM
Re the 512, as much as I like Aimpoint, you can't beat free. If you try it, mount it with the small hex screw (as opposed to the big thumb screw)and some blue loc-tite. Lithium AA's will help with battery life.

One of the big 512 issues is the spring cups in the battery box coming loose and falling out. The best soloution I've seen is found here: http://www.kyledefoor.com/2009/12/mounting-tips-and-eotech-secret.html

If you keep the 512, I recommend a spare battery box and a Larue mount.

The reticle is the EO-tech is one of it's strengths. The 1 MOA center dot is precise and the 6 o'clock has mark mark of the 65 MOA ring can be used as a POA/POI sight at 7 yards to compensate for off-set. ( Work gun, 100 yard zero, Federal 62 gr. soft point)

AMEN brother. Free is good. It appears to be fashionable to bash EOTech. They have been selling a lot of EDS for a lot of years. I was told at the SHOT by one of their managers that they can update the "electronics" of the older sights to greatly improve battery life. You can get battery boxes and other small parts through Brownells. If the old 512 sits too low on the rail and puts your dot behind the front sight post, there is a .3 EOTech riser that will cowitness the irons in the lower 1/3 of the EOTech screen. The riser is about $32. AA battries are cheap. Free is good. EOTech sights may not be as bad as some bashers say. If I was to buy a new RDS, if it were an EOTech, it would be one of the sights with a riser built in. It would probably be the one that uses one 123 battery turned sidesways. Then again I might buy an Aimpoint. I would try the EOTech sight before selling it as junk.

Odin Bravo One
02-19-2012, 11:39 AM
I was told at the SHOT by one of their managers that they can update the "electronics" of the older sights to greatly improve battery life. You can get battery boxes and other small parts through Brownells. If the old 512 sits too low on the rail and puts your dot behind the front sight post, there is a .3 EOTech riser that will cowitness the irons in the lower 1/3 of the EOTech screen. The riser is about $32. AA battries are cheap. Free is good. EOTech sights may not be as bad as some bashers say.

Or you can buy an AimPoint, and not have to buy parts out of Brownells, or upgrade your electronics to improve battery life.

I agree that free is a very good price.

And while some may find it fashionable to bash EOTech's, I don't concern myself with fashion. 10 years of watching failure after failure, as well as being personally involved in trying to get these issues solved at an organizational level has left me with the opinion that if someone were to give me an EOTech for free, I would sell it someone who loved them and use the money to buy an optic I didn't have to wonder about.

jstyer
02-26-2012, 09:40 AM
10 years of watching failure after failure, as well as being personally involved in trying to get these issues solved at an organizational level has left me with the opinion that if someone were to give me an EOTech for free, I would sell it someone who loved them and use the money to buy an optic I didn't have to wonder about.

Couldn't agree more. My best friend (basically brother) and I were just talking about this. Every time he requalifies for carbine with Texas DPS he says at least two trooper's eotech units won't turn on AT ALL. And of the rest around 70-80% of them have dead batteries.

He was an eotech mega-fanboi... But after four years of seeing this he now only uses aimpoint on personal guns. It's a shame to think his duty weapon could share this fate in the event he ever needs it.

Little Creek
03-04-2012, 09:09 AM
Dead batteries are a PIA. I like the idea of replacing batteries only on my birthday. Does anyone have any expierence/preference for the Aimpoint PRO over the Aimpoint T-1? For those of us who wear corrective lens and see EDS as fuzz balls, anyone have eny expierence with low powered/variable scopes for carbines?

JDM
03-04-2012, 09:13 AM
Thanks to the knowledge shared in this thread, a long phone conversation with one of our SMEs, and the exceptional generosity of a friend; followed by superb zeroing guidance from another excellent friend, I'm done putting this together.

My first hard use rifle is as follows:

DDM4 V1
Aimpoint ML3
VTAC 2 point padded sling
Streamlight TLR1

I have lots of XM193, and a very strong 100 yard zero. Now I just need a class, and lots of time to shoot.

Thanks to everyone that helped, and to everyone that contributed to this thread.

Failure2Stop
03-04-2012, 10:58 AM
Dead batteries are a PIA. I like the idea of replacing batteries only on my birthday. Does anyone have any expierence/preference for the Aimpoint PRO over the Aimpoint T-1? For those of us who wear corrective lens and see EDS as fuzz balls, anyone have eny expierence with low powered/variable scopes for carbines?

My corneas have been scraped more times than a Jacksonville stripper, so every dot optic presents me with a less than perfect dot. I can use them decently, but I do prefer a traditional reticle.

jstyer
03-04-2012, 11:34 AM
Dead batteries are a PIA. I like the idea of replacing batteries only on my birthday. Does anyone have any expierence/preference for the Aimpoint PRO over the Aimpoint T-1? For those of us who wear corrective lens and see EDS as fuzz balls, anyone have eny expierence with low powered/variable scopes for carbines?

I've been running a Leatherwood CMR 1-4 power illuminated scope lately. So far I've been really happy with it! I actually have a green reticled model on my gun right now, as well as a red reticle model that was on my gun for about a day before I switched to the green reticle. If you're interested Little Creek, I'll ship the red reticle scope and a mount to you for you to try out... If you like it you can buy it. If it's not for you, no big deal just send it back. PM me if you want to give it a go.

JHC
03-04-2012, 01:05 PM
My corneas have been scraped more times than a Jacksonville stripper, so every dot optic presents me with a less than perfect dot. I can use them decently, but I do prefer a traditional reticle.

If an Aimpoint "dot" was just fuzzy to my eyes I'd have one. But along this vision thing, I see them as a 12 moa stripe that runs from 11 o'clock to 5 o'clock. And my shooting with them reflects it from 50 yards on out. It's been awhile since I used one but for some reason the EOTech sight didn't create this effect.

I shot the battery version RMR last weekend and the dot was perfectly crisp and round. It could have gotten in my head had it not been turning off in recoil on the G19 it was on.

I've been much happier with the Nikon 1-4x ($279), Leupold VX-7 1.5-6x, Trijicon TR24 1-4x (Ger #3 or whatever) and the 2nd focal plane version Vortec 1-4x. (I haven't owned them all but have used them.)

Odin Bravo One
03-04-2012, 05:29 PM
My first hard use rifle is as follows:

DDM4 V1
Aimpoint ML3
VTAC 2 point padded sling
Streamlight TLR1

I have lots of XM193, and a very strong 100 yard zero. Now I just need a class, and lots of time to shoot.
.


You could have spent much more, and got much less. Pretty decent package...............

HCM
03-05-2012, 03:11 PM
Couldn't agree more. My best friend (basically brother) and I were just talking about this. Every time he requalifies for carbine with Texas DPS he says at least two trooper's eotech units won't turn on AT ALL. And of the rest around 70-80% of them have dead batteries.

He was an eotech mega-fanboi... But after four years of seeing this he now only uses aimpoint on personal guns. It's a shame to think his duty weapon could share this fate in the event he ever needs it.

I have 32 EO 512's at work (not my choice). We change Lithium AA batteries every six months, if lithiums aren’t available, we change regular AA' s every 3 months.

On my personally guns - 1 EO 512 (mirrors my work gun) and ... 4 Aimpoints ...

Al T.
03-12-2012, 07:13 PM
Replaced my ML3 with an Aimpoint H-1. Very, very nice. :)

One thing I forgot to mention, ammo ain't ammo. Buddy of mine was trying to establish a 200y zero and was having terrible results from what should have been a super AR. He had initially zeroed at 50y. One of our local SMEs wandered over and with out a pause told him it was his ammo. What worked "OK" at 50 yards sucked at 200.

DonovanM
03-29-2012, 11:09 PM
Love this forum. This thread was very helpful, thank you to all involved.

(Just bought my first long gun, a DD M4V7 LW :))

JMS
03-30-2012, 12:02 PM
He had initially zeroed at 50y.

Something else to bear in mind is that the 50/200 zero on the most common AR configurations (14.5"/16" barrel) is meant to be shot at 50yd to produce roughly a 200 meter zero....which is nearly 219yds; orionz06 alludes to this in his 11 Feb post above. If those rounds were simply significantly high compared to where you thought they'd be, there's a chance that it was behaving as it ought.

In the absence of a description of the results and of the ammo, I'm not trying to assert that that's what happened vice the ammo issue you mentioned, but it IS a common error to think that 50/200 is strictly in yards, and an even more common error to default to thinking that, at distance, yards and meters are interchangable.

orionz06
03-30-2012, 12:07 PM
Something else to bear in mind is that the 50/200 zero on the most common AR configurations (14.5"/16" barrel) is meant to be shot at 50yd to produce roughly a 200 meter zero....which is nearly 219yds; orionz06 alludes to this in his 11 Feb post above. If those rounds were simply significantly high compared to where you thought they'd be, there's a chance that it was behaving as it ought.

In the absence of a description of the results and of the ammo, I'm not trying to assert that that's what happened vice the ammo issue you mentioned, but it IS a common error to think that 50/200 is strictly in yards, and an even more common error to default to thinking that, at distance, yards and meters are interchangable.

To add to this, a few weeks back I had a chance to try out a buddies new blaster, 10.5" LMT. He said it was zeroed to 200 yards with the ammo being used. I confirmed with him that it was in fact a rock solid 200 yards. Shooting at plates out at 300 was a direct hold. Consistent hits without any compensation. 10/10 actually. He was baffled. He used a 25 yard approximation of a 50 yard zero thinking it was a 200 yard zero, using an ammo that would not have the same intersection points in the first place.

Holds for a 100 yard zero, with most any barrel length AR shooting most any ammo are about the same, something worth considering.


FYI, you can hit steel consistently at distance with a knock off Aimpoint, Wolf ammo, and a short barrel AR.

Odin Bravo One
03-30-2012, 05:22 PM
FYI, you can hit steel consistently at distance with a knock off Aimpoint, Wolf ammo, and a short barrel AR.

You can, if that is your only goal.

If your goal is to be able to effectively employ a carbine against anything other than paper or steel, in conditions that extend beyond a picture perfect range day, then the proper equipment, ammunition, and zero come into play.

rob_s
03-30-2012, 06:38 PM
If you don't shoot the gun at 200 yards you do not have a 200 yard zero. You should come back and check your POI at 100, 50, and 25 (at least). You can approximate all of this with a computer or software but eventually you need to GO SHOOT THE GUN.

If you achieve POI=POA at 25 or 50 yards you have an initial intersection, or near zero, at that distance. Not a zero, far zero, or true zero. Lacking the qualifier, the term "zero" alone refers to far, or true, zero.

I also see people that do not understand geometry. Outside of strange gusts or other phenomena, a 2" group at 5 yards that someone may find to be acceptable can yield a group 8" or more at 200. I suggest firing 10-shot groups at 200, and not fiddling with nobs until you have shot enough at that distance to see a trend.

Al T.
04-02-2012, 01:58 PM
Outside of strange gusts or other phenomena, a 2" group at 50 yards that someone may find to be acceptable can yield a group 8" or more at 200.

Eggzactly. In this guys specific instance, it was indeed ammo related. I have also witnessed many times, folks with deer rifles who just can't accept that sloppy shooting that does OK at 100y sucks at 200y and beyond.

Back to the AR platform, one of my most puzzling was trying to get someone zero'd with a parts gun. Ran out of elevation. Turned out the FSB was from a rifle (not F marked).

Parts ain't parts*.




* Book of Pat Rogers Chapter One, Verse 3.

iakdrago
04-24-2012, 11:07 PM
My corneas have been scraped more times than a Jacksonville stripper, so every dot optic presents me with a less than perfect dot. I can use them decently, but I do prefer a traditional reticle.

On your home defense carbine, do you still use a variable scope, or do you switch out for a red dot?

Failure2Stop
04-25-2012, 06:28 AM
On your home defense carbine, do you still use a variable scope, or do you switch out for a red dot?

My HD AR is different than my GP carbine.
HD: Lightweight middy w/ pinned FSB and fixed DD rear, RediMod, and an Aimpoint T1.
GP: 6920 with Troy folding rear and a low power variable.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Jay Cunningham
04-25-2012, 07:00 AM
My HD AR is different than my GP carbine.

Yeah, that's where I'm at too. Funny where you wind up.

rob_s
04-25-2012, 07:08 AM
Hell, my HD gun has been different than my GP gun since at least 2007. I AM a proponent of keeping the controls and such as close to the same as possible.

Something I've never done with these two guns is run both of them through a series of standards to see which is really better at what. I suspect I might surprise myself.

NETim
04-25-2012, 07:40 AM
So, what's everyone think of Grip Pods?

http://www.grippod.com/http://www.grippod.com/

orionz06
04-25-2012, 07:42 AM
In my limited experience with one (got rid of it) they suck as both a VFG and as a bipod.

Jay Cunningham
04-25-2012, 07:50 AM
Something I've never done with these two guns is run both of them through a series of standards to see which is really better at what. I suspect I might surprise myself.

Might make a cool spin-off thread: I'd participate.

rob_s
04-25-2012, 08:21 AM
It definitely goes beyond carbine basics, as it requires two guns, which are both purpose-built, and some proficiency in the fundamentals to be able to accurately compare and take shooter error out of the equation.

http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?3963-HD-vs-GP-carbine&p=67685#post67685

Little Creek
04-30-2012, 06:09 AM
So, what's everyone think of Grip Pods?

http://www.grippod.com/http://www.grippod.com/

I recently bought one at a gun show. It works great as a kick stand for your carbine. I have used it some as a vertical grip, less as a bipod. I am not ready to get rid of mine just yet. I have a MOE handguard and I think the MOE vertical grip works better as a vertical grip. I will try it from prone soon.

vmi-mo
04-30-2012, 12:01 PM
So, what's everyone think of Grip Pods?

http://www.grippod.com/http://www.grippod.com/


Grip pods are worthless.

As a VFG they are heavy, HUGE and dont fit my "gripping style"
As a bipod they increase your profile by 3". They lack a swivel mechanism. they are worthless on any type of uneven terrain.
It is another example of trying to do everything with one thing. It usually doesnt work.

A magazine makes a fine monopod.

JMS
05-01-2012, 01:44 PM
It works great as a kick stand for your carbine.

Yep. A common epithet for them is "DFAC Kickstand," because the flat tile floor of a chow-hall is about the only place they work well, and only to keep your gun off the floor. The donnybrook that resulted from the attempt to ensure that the M27 IAR was not fielded with those POSs, 3-point slings, and ARMS BUISs was.....shrill....., but ultimately successful.

BWT
05-03-2012, 10:55 PM
So what about the classic question when mounting a rail?

Shave the FSB or Clamp it on?

FSB is more durable, Clamps are adjustable and give a better gas seal though, and everybody runs them in (insert competition shooting league).

rob_s
05-04-2012, 05:13 AM
I would suggest starting with the clamp on if you've never run a longer handguard with a rail-mount front sight. If you decide you like it you can come back later and put the shaved FSB on which is more secure. If you want the FSB to stick up through the handguard you can do that too.

If you already know for sure what you want then I'd chop off the FSB.

JRas
05-09-2012, 07:51 AM
So what about the classic question when mounting a rail?

Shave the FSB or Clamp it on?

FSB is more durable, Clamps are adjustable and give a better gas seal though, and everybody runs them in (insert competition shooting league).

Do they give a better gas seal?

I had mine shaved

edit: question for the experts

I want to run a 2-point sling, I have a rail to mount the front one, and a stock with a swivel mount. I've heard good things from end plate mounts and them being better than a stock mount, opinions?

orionz06
05-09-2012, 07:53 AM
How is the better gas seal measured? If it is better there must be a way to determine it, right?

Failure2Stop
05-09-2012, 09:33 AM
I want to run a 2-point sling, I have a rail to mount the front one, and a stock with a swivel mount. I've heard good things from end plate mounts and them being better than a stock mount, opinions?

I prefer to mount my sling to the outside of the stock. Easier shoulder transitions, less sling tangle.

I really only like an RE attachment for single point slings, and I don't generally use those on anything but breaching shotguns.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Steve S.
05-09-2012, 10:25 AM
J,

Where do you run your front attachment point? Also, why do you prefer the stock over the RE as the rear attachment?

I've gravitated towards using a rail mounted front - just ahead of the barrel nut (think DD's integral QD slot) and off the RE as the rear. But I'm always open to change based on what works best.

Totally agree on single points, and their role on breaching shotguns.



I prefer to mount my sling to the outside of the stock. Easier shoulder transitions, less sling tangle.

I really only like an RE attachment for single point slings, and I don't generally use those on anything but breaching shotguns.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Steve S.
05-09-2012, 11:03 AM
The TLR1 is a bit taller then the X300. I'm also a big fan of the X300 over the TLR1. I find the switch easier to use, and much less likely to have a white light ND / AD - which in a defensive situation can be serious.

One thing I found helped when I ran a pistol light at 12 o'clock was to put a little bright orange or neon yellow paint on the tip of the front sight post. Depending on where your FSP sits once zero'd, it can be very little protrusion above the TLR1 (looks like your FSP sits pretty high up though). Anyways, a dab of paint really helped me pick up my FSP over the WML body.

I've since moved back to running a Surefire 6P at 1 o'clock though. I like the ability to adjust the sensitivity of the momentary on tailcap - and lock it out if needed.


I've got 400 rounds of XM193 through my DD M4 as of this evening and I have some observations, and questions.

Observations:

The build quality of a Mil Spec rifle is readily apparent. Simple field stripping, and finger banging of this rifle allows one to realize how very different a Daniel Defense product is from a Bushmaster/DPMS/ETC.
It is easier to deliver effective hits on a target with a rifle than a pistol (DUH)
The A2 pistol grip sucks. I took rob_s' advice, and gave it an honest go, but dammit if that chunk of plastic sticking out of the exact place where it isn't supposed to isn't the worst thing ever. I even hacksawed off the offending bump, and added grip tape to the A2 grip, and it was still rubbish; only now it was way to skinny for my hands. I sprung for a MOE grip (which I had to apply a round file to to make the mounting hole in the grip align with the hole in the rifle...meh).
I purchased a padded VTAC MK2 sling for this rifle after numerous SME recommendations, and while I like it, I think I need a forward QD swivel mount, as I cannot snug the sling to my body using the current DD QD sling swivel mount that is near the barrel nut; the sling is way to long even at its shortest length to be properly adjusted for me.
Questions:

I currently have a TLR-1s mounted at 12:00. I really like the TLR-1 series when applied to pistols, but I am curious about how they fare when used on Rifles.
I can see a good amount of the TLR-1s in front of the FSB, (and even a bit in front of the front sight post itself) -- is this a problem? The sight picture is not upset in any way, but one can definitely see the light. (see photos below)
I'm primarily going to be practicing with XM193, is there a good (read DocGKR recommended) SD load that has an interchangeable or very similar zero to this load? M855 is also a viable practice default, so SD loads with a similar zero to M855 are welcome too.
Who wants to go rabbit hunting?
TLR photos:
http://i1192.photobucket.com/albums/aa334/fatcook/IMG_1458.jpg
http://i1192.photobucket.com/albums/aa334/fatcook/IMG_1455.jpg
Thanks again to all the participants in this thread!

BWT
05-09-2012, 07:15 PM
Do they give a better gas seal?

I had mine shaved

edit: question for the experts

I want to run a 2-point sling, I have a rail to mount the front one, and a stock with a swivel mount. I've heard good things from end plate mounts and them being better than a stock mount, opinions?

That's what a gunsmith that just finished telling me that shaving a FSB was an absolute Pain in the Butt told me.

Honestly, if it does, I've never heard of it, not say that I'm an expert.

I'd go with a shaved FSB versus a clamp on. I'm just surprised some Manufacturer hasn't made them available.

ETA: I was asking him for a price quote, because I realized I had none of the tools to do it, and no space to do it in, and rather than purchasing a work bench, vise, dremel tool, to take an amateur's swing at it... why not drop the upper off at a qualified Gunsmith?

rob_s
05-09-2012, 07:37 PM
qualified Gunsmith?

rarer than hen's teeth when it comes to ARs.

JDM
05-09-2012, 07:39 PM
rarer than hen's teeth when it comes to ARs.

Why is that?

BWT
05-09-2012, 07:40 PM
rarer than hen's teeth when it comes to ARs.

Honestly, I'd normally absolutely agree, but... He's type 07/02 SOT, a Manufacturer of AR's and a Mechanical Engineer.

I figured he'd be okay to shave a FSB and install a rail.

He's one of the few I'd trust with my gun.

(ETA: Forgot a coma)

rob_s
05-09-2012, 07:42 PM
Shaving an FSB is stupid easy, but can be a little time consuming if you let it get the best of you.

BWT
05-09-2012, 07:56 PM
Shaving an FSB is stupid easy, but can be a little time consuming if you let it get the best of you.

You're right, but I'll be honest with you, I don't have a work bench, I don't have a vise to lock the rifle into while I'm doing it, I don't have a dremel tool, I have punches and a hammer, but I don't have the blocks to drop the AR upper in a vise, I would need to go find some kind of phosphate finish to touch it up, and I don't have a place even if I was willing to buy that stuff, to put it in, i.e., a garage available. I'd need to cut the delta ring off the rifle, because I think I'd go with a Troy 13'' VTAC Alpha Rail.

Honestly, I could probably get by with a dremel, a table, and a vise, but... a good vise, you're going to spend 60-100+, easy, a dremel tool is 40-60.

I'll do some project stuff, I change my oil, filters, head lights, etc, in my car. I'll do basic gun maintenance, replace springs, grips, safeties, triggers, etc, especially on an AR.

It's also a time and warranty thing. I'd rather drop the gun off, spend $40-60 and pick it up. One day, when I have a garage of my own, etc, I'll be more willing to do it, but I don't have the time or resources currently.

SSDsurf puts on a great video about doing it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5rPPyYdFUs&feature=plcp

I didn't even try to install my G2 Trigger group, I gave it to them and waited 20 minutes, and for 30-40$, they installed it. (ETA: In my Arsenal SGL21 that is)

rob_s
05-10-2012, 03:56 AM
By saying "stupid easy" I wasn't implying you should necessarily do it yourself (although plenty of people have come over to my house and been walked through all manner of AR assembly or customization tasks, so you might have someone else in your neighborhood that is a jerk on the internet but actually a nice guy willing to help people that ask in real life ;) ) but was referring to your comment " a gunsmith that just finished telling me that shaving a FSB was an absolute Pain in the Butt told me." That would give me pause in terms of giving him the work. He's already indicated he doesn't want to do it, and one could argue that by that quote he may not quite know how to do it.

rob_s
05-10-2012, 03:59 AM
Why is that?

Because when most people say "gunsmith" what they really mean is the old dude down at the shop that mounts scopes and does "trigger jobs" by filing all the surface hardness away. The AR isn't complicated but it's not granddad's hunting rifle, and the plain fact is that most 'smiths are hacks to begin with they just don't get caught at it until they get into something like the AR that's kind of complex in terms of how it goes together. The internets is full of pictures and threads from people that took their ARs "to the local gunsmith" and came home with disasters. One of my favorites are the guys that go to get a permanently attached flash hider removed and the 'smith clamps down on the upper and just starts cranking away on the flash hider, most times cracking the upper receiver. That alone is chock full of ignorance-based mistakes.

JRas
06-20-2012, 01:30 PM
I agree with above, and you pay for qualified armorers

Question for you guys, got a vickers 2 point sling. I bought myself a QD rail mount put it on the left side furthest back I could. I attached the other end to a QD mount on stock. The gun hangs more straight and a little left. Would end plate mount fix this?

Odin Bravo One
06-20-2012, 03:59 PM
Define "fix this".

What I am really asking, is what are you trying to fix, and is it broken to begin with?

If you need your gun out of the way when you let it hang to either get to a secondary weapon, or to go hands on, I have found that routing the rear of the sling through the top slot on the buttstock turns the weapon inboard for me (right handed), with the ejection port facing away from my body. However, if I use my hand to turn it as I set it in place, it hangs the opposite direction, and will stay there for a reasonable amount of activity. It also hangs slightly to the left of my centerline, which is where I want it going, if I am needing to access some other piece of life saving gear from my right side.........like a pistol.

JRas
06-20-2012, 05:29 PM
It works, I just don't see the big advantage compared to a one point. I have trouble moving the rifle up at a high ready or moving it up and tilting it for reloads. Transitions it feels fine, support hand guide the rifle to the left while my right goes for my secondary. I feel restricted, I thought it would feel better than a one point. What will the rear endplate change?


Define "fix this".

What I am really asking, is what are you trying to fix, and is it broken to begin with?

If you need your gun out of the way when you let it hang to either get to a secondary weapon, or to go hands on, I have found that routing the rear of the sling through the top slot on the buttstock turns the weapon inboard for me (right handed), with the ejection port facing away from my body. However, if I use my hand to turn it as I set it in place, it hangs the opposite direction, and will stay there for a reasonable amount of activity. It also hangs slightly to the left of my centerline, which is where I want it going, if I am needing to access some other piece of life saving gear from my right side.........like a pistol.

Odin Bravo One
06-20-2012, 07:29 PM
It may be that a single point will work better for you.

Something that is often forgotten when it comes to gear....the guys who designed it had their reasons. Their reasons may not translate to your needs or requirements. I have absolutely no use for a single point sling. None whatsoever. Certainly I can do all of the sexy, high speed shooting, shoulder transitions, reloads, etc. all easier than with a two point sling. But I have my reasons for a two point sling, and no amount of sexy is changing that.

If the two point doesn't work for, or any piece of gear doesn't work for you..........don't force it just because some dude put his name on it. What works for one person doesn't universally translate to mean works for everyone.

Jay Cunningham
06-20-2012, 07:42 PM
It may be that a single point will work better for you.

Something that is often forgotten when it comes to gear....the guys who designed it had their reasons. Their reasons may not translate to your needs or requirements. I have absolutely no use for a single point sling. None whatsoever. Certainly I can do all of the sexy, high speed shooting, shoulder transitions, reloads, etc. all easier than with a two point sling. But I have my reasons for a two point sling, and no amount of sexy is changing that.

If the two point doesn't work for, or any piece of gear doesn't work for you..........don't force it just because some dude put his name on it. What works for one person doesn't universally translate to mean works for everyone.

Holy +1 Batman

Looking for the "like" button...

Al T.
06-20-2012, 07:50 PM
If the two point doesn't work for, or any piece of gear doesn't work for you..........don't force it just because some dude put his name on it. What works for one person doesn't universally translate to mean works for everyone.

Gold right there. Solid, 24k gold. :cool:

JRas
06-21-2012, 08:33 AM
I really haven't trained with it enough at this point. I like a lot of the stuff a 2-point does, and this sling is probably the best 2-point I've used. I just need to fine tune the way it hangs. I ordered up a QD end plate after reading below quote.

reading militarymorons and found this:
"When the rear of the sling is attached to the buttstock, I found it more difficult to transition the stock to the weak shoulder, even with the sling length adjusted all the way out. With the front of the sling attached to the rear of the rail, it doesn't come across and interfere with my support hand. This setup is surprisingly similar to my MMSM 3-pt sling setup that I came up with 3 years ago (lower down on this page). Attaching the rear of the sling to the receiver instead of the buttstock also makes tucking the buttstock under the arm for reloads possible without letting out some slack, if that's what you like to do. That's more difficult with it attached to the buttstock. Configuration (3) was the best balance between the manouverability of a single-point and the control of a two-point for me, personally (basically a minimally trained, unprofessional shooter)."


It may be that a single point will work better for you.

Something that is often forgotten when it comes to gear....the guys who designed it had their reasons. Their reasons may not translate to your needs or requirements. I have absolutely no use for a single point sling. None whatsoever. Certainly I can do all of the sexy, high speed shooting, shoulder transitions, reloads, etc. all easier than with a two point sling. But I have my reasons for a two point sling, and no amount of sexy is changing that.

If the two point doesn't work for, or any piece of gear doesn't work for you..........don't force it just because some dude put his name on it. What works for one person doesn't universally translate to mean works for everyone.

rob_s
06-21-2012, 08:46 AM
I agree with above, and you pay for qualified armorers

Question for you guys, got a vickers 2 point sling. I bought myself a QD rail mount put it on the left side furthest back I could. I attached the other end to a QD mount on stock. The gun hangs more straight and a little left. Would end plate mount fix this?

As others mentioned, you'll have to find what works for you. Think of the gun as having four basic attachment points:
A - FSB or forward-of it
B - barrel nut or slightly forward of it
C - castle nut, or thereabouts
D - stock (toe, heel, whatever)

Then you have sides, ejection-port side and bolt-catch side

For me, with most 2-point slings, I am going with an "A bolt catch" front attachment and a "D ejection port" rear attachment. I find that gives me the most stability slung, the most freedom of movement, and I can swing the gun to my back when I don't need it.

On short guns I like a 2-to-1-point convertible I made out of a BFG VCAS sling, and in that case I attach "B bolt catch" to the front and "C centerline" for the rear.

Failure2Stop
06-21-2012, 11:37 AM
I prefer my slings to have the rear attachment point on the outside of the buttstock. It allows shoulder transitions to be faster than a single point as long as the user has the sling appropriately adjusted.

I put my forward sling point either fully forward or fully to the rear depending on what the gun has attached to it and the primary purpose of the gun. A long gun with nothing attached that is to be used for precision fire will have the sling fully forward so I can use it as a stability aid. A short gun with an IR aiming laser/flood with a light that if gong to be used in tight confines in which there is a high probability that I might have to accesses or completely switch to my pistol or breaching tools, will have the forward sling mounting point all the way to the rear of the rail to provide more forward rail space for the hand and to avoid interfering with the mounted devices, gives the gun a better "ride" when it's hands-free and stowed to the side, and is less likely to snag.

I wear my carbine sling over my strong side shoulder and under my support side arm.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Cecil Burch
06-21-2012, 11:45 AM
I prefer my slings to have the rear attachment point on the outside of the buttstock. It allows shoulder transitions to be faster than a single point as long as the user has the sling appropriately adjusted.



I'm kind of an idiot when it comes to visualization most of the time. Any chance you could post a pic so I could make sure I am understanding you correctly? Thanks!

Odin Bravo One
06-21-2012, 02:53 PM
Having the sling attached to the rear, outside of the stock also allows a consistent cheek weld, in addition to the transitions and reload issues.

I see a lot of people concerning themselves with some wazoo shit that has very little real world application. As I continue to preach, you are certainly entitled to do what you want, and I am NOT the tactics police, but a thought to consider is to become proficient enough with the basics before concerning yourself with the weak hand only, upside down re-load during the combat roll. When you have mastered the basics with a two point sling (or any sling for that matter), you will find just about anything else you are doing with a carbine to be kindergarten simple.

Failure2Stop
06-22-2012, 12:51 PM
I'm kind of an idiot when it comes to visualization most of the time. Any chance you could post a pic so I could make sure I am understanding you correctly? Thanks!

http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm174/Fail2Stop/2012-06-22_13-27-10_456.jpg
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm174/Fail2Stop/2012-06-22_13-28-08_878.jpg

Cecil Burch
06-22-2012, 04:40 PM
Thank you very much!




http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm174/Fail2Stop/2012-06-22_13-27-10_456.jpg
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm174/Fail2Stop/2012-06-22_13-28-08_878.jpg

Odin Bravo One
06-23-2012, 02:19 AM
Different spin on the same idea.

VTAC Sling......
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v690/SavageHunter/Untitled-2.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v690/SavageHunter/DSCF0374.jpg

Vickers
Same basic method, through the top slot, outside the top of the stock, and laying to the left side of the gun.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v690/SavageHunter/Untitled-1.jpg

TRICON with push button swivels on both ends, attached to opposite side on the stock.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v690/SavageHunter/Untitled.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v690/SavageHunter/DSCF0378.jpg

JRas
06-24-2012, 11:18 PM
I have my sling setup like that, QD on outside of stock. I find the inside interferes putting the buttpad into position. I'm confused how you don't have the same issue as me. Mine just hangs like a one point muzzle at knee area maybe a tiny bit offset, defintely bangs your knees.

Odin Bravo One
06-26-2012, 02:41 PM
I'm not sure I understand the question.

My carbine hangs muzzle at about mid-thigh, maybe a little higher.

rob_s
06-26-2012, 03:09 PM
I have my sling setup like that, QD on outside of stock. I find the inside interferes putting the buttpad into position. I'm confused how you don't have the same issue as me. Mine just hangs like a one point muzzle at knee area maybe a tiny bit offset, defintely bangs your knees.

More relevant is where the stock pad rides. Nipples or above is a good start.

JMS
06-28-2012, 01:06 PM
That, and the "bangs the knees" aspect is something that happens fairly frequently with the no-kidding "DUMP the gun" crowd that simply just lets go of the thing and lets it fall where it may. Even if that cat doesn't collect a shot the to his beanbag with the magazine (possible, even for folks required to run armor with a "codpiece"), the gun's probably gonna end up between the knees or in a position not offset enough to keep it from flopping.

Or, even if they are controlling how the carbine is brought down, they don't turn it so that the ejection port is facing the body (presuming RH shooter). If the gun's turned, the magazine falls under the forearm-mounted/forward side of the sling, which traps the gun a bit. At least, compared to guiding it down so the the ejection port is facing outboard, and definitely compared to just letting it go.

For that sling configuration, or even those of us who use an external mount at the forwardmost part of the receiver extension (Tango Down PR-4 or similar....), turning the gun so that the sling traps the mag, and therefore the gun, up against one's body works pretty well to keep it as immobilized as it ever will be. It's never gonna be pefectly still.

Jay Cunningham
07-11-2012, 09:30 AM
Mounting the sling inboard at the rear of the stock will require you to drop your arm out of the sling (assuming that we're talking about 2 point quick adjust slings) to transition the carbine over to your weak shoulder. The sling will choke you out if you try to stay slung in.

Alternately you can move the attachment point outboard on the stock and you can remain slung in without asphyxiation.

JRas
08-12-2012, 09:13 AM
Would it be better to mount a sling on a plate carrier or separate? (through the shoulder pads mounted to the back)

this looks like an answer to me switching over to a one point:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfWv27yFnG4

Failure2Stop
08-12-2012, 04:26 PM
Would it be better to mount a sling on a plate carrier or separate? (through the shoulder pads mounted to the back)

this looks like an answer to me switching over to a one point:

I hate attaching a long gun directly to my armor.
It severely limits use, and complicates things that should be simple. Lots of dudes do it downrange, but that doesn't mean that it's a good idea.

In my opinion, the device that Kyle is discussing there is more for those that have decided that the one point is what they want to use. I have yet to have anything push me back to one point slings away from modern 2-point slings. That most certainly doesn't negate Kyle's preference or opinion, just my experience.

BCL
08-12-2012, 04:37 PM
I hate attaching a long gun directly to my armor.
It severely limits use, and complicates things that should be simple. Lots of dudes do it downrange, but that doesn't mean that it's a good idea.

In my opinion, the device that Kyle is discussing there is more for those that have decided that the one point is what they want to use. I have yet to have anything push me back to one point slings away from modern 2-point slings. That most certainly doesn't negate Kyle's preference or opinion, just my experience.

I'd have to double check from a computer, but i believe Kyle said on his blog (the old one) that the S&S Precision set up in the video was created for a specific mission set and that 99% of shooters would be fine with a good adjustable 2-point sling.

jstyer
08-12-2012, 08:39 PM
I've really been enjoying the sling discussions... all I've ever seriously used has been the magpul sling. I run it single point unless I need to capture the gun handsfree for an extended amount of time, which I then switch to double.

Of the two points I've tried, (BFG and VTAC) I've always managed to choke-hold myself, or end up in some sort of origami inspired spider web. I know I'm doing it wrong... and I'm looking forward to seeing how you use your sling in the College Station class Jack.

JRas
08-12-2012, 10:10 PM
I hate attaching a long gun directly to my armor.
It severely limits use, and complicates things that should be simple. Lots of dudes do it downrange, but that doesn't mean that it's a good idea.

In my opinion, the device that Kyle is discussing there is more for those that have decided that the one point is what they want to use. I have yet to have anything push me back to one point slings away from modern 2-point slings. That most certainly doesn't negate Kyle's preference or opinion, just my experience.

I believe your right on that one Sir, look at how many MIL/LEO's still run SERPA's...

My thoughts on slings after some use with BFG VCAS:

pros:
retention
transitions
easily adjustable
quality sling

cons:
high ready
reloads
shoulder transitions
overall feeling of being restricted

Kyles thoughts someone mentioned above:
http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=103344

I have a love hate relationship with S&S. They have some innovative products; however they charge entirely too dam much. I thought Hk was bad... that S&S sling clip is $100 plus!

shootist26
08-13-2012, 07:38 PM
I believe your right on that one Sir, look at how many MIL/LEO's still run SERPA's...

My thoughts on slings after some use with BFG VCAS:

pros:
retention
transitions
easily adjustable
quality sling

cons:
high ready
reloads
shoulder transitions
overall feeling of being restricted

Kyles thoughts someone mentioned above:
http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=103344

I have a love hate relationship with S&S. They have some innovative products; however they charge entirely too dam much. I thought Hk was bad... that S&S sling clip is $100 plus!

I tend to run my VCAS looser and attached to the rear of the stock on the outboard side. This helped a lot with the high ready position and the issue of getting choked when transitioning shoulders. Never had an issue with reloads.

Failure2Stop
08-13-2012, 11:20 PM
I tend to run my VCAS looser and attached to the rear of the stock on the outboard side. This helped a lot with the high ready position and the issue of getting choked when transitioning shoulders. Never had an issue with reloads.

This.

Steady Up
08-13-2012, 11:26 PM
I believe your right on that one Sir, look at how many MIL/LEO's still run SERPA's...

My thoughts on slings after some use with BFG VCAS:

pros:
retention
transitions
easily adjustable
quality sling

cons:
high ready
reloads
shoulder transitions
overall feeling of being restricted

Kyles thoughts someone mentioned above:
http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=103344

I have a love hate relationship with S&S. They have some innovative products; however they charge entirely too dam much. I thought Hk was bad... that S&S sling clip is $100 plus!

I'd suggest trying to run the sling looser. I initially felt the same way about my VCAS, but it turns out I was just slung too tight. I typically run my sling with half of the slack out while shooting, and I have no trouble with reloads or high ready. For should transitions, I let out the rest of the slack, and I'm good to go (I run my sling mounted on the outboard rear side of my stock, and at the barrel nut).

Failure2Stop
08-13-2012, 11:29 PM
I've really been enjoying the sling discussions... all I've ever seriously used has been the magpul sling. I run it single point unless I need to capture the gun handsfree for an extended amount of time, which I then switch to double.

Of the two points I've tried, (BFG and VTAC) I've always managed to choke-hold myself, or end up in some sort of origami inspired spider web. I know I'm doing it wrong... and I'm looking forward to seeing how you use your sling in the College Station class Jack.

No sweat.
If you want any more detail on anything, feel free to PM or email me.
I have no issue with people buying, using, and loving whatever sling they happen to use, I just like to help people avoid things that might not be what they are looking for, or don't have the information on how to use something in a specific context.
I use gear that works for me in my envelope of necessity. I am a certain size, with a certain level of physical strength and dexterity, and of a certain skill and experience level, with a certain level of expected performance in certain conditions that I consider important. My gear matches that. There is no one else that perfectly matches my profile. Having seen a lot of things, I can give general advice, but (to steal a line from SeanM), I'm not the tactics/gear/guns police, and I don't hold all the answers to the true path of tactical enlightenment.
I just do what I can to help.

rob_s
08-14-2012, 04:35 AM
Using the SOB sling I "wear it like a necklace" as Defoor says and leave my arm out of it when shooting. At least for the most part. The way that Shrek had me adjust it was a bit looser than I would have naturally adjusted it (and had up to that point) on my own.

Both things, along with mounting outboard on the stock, help with range of motion.

Dropkick
10-29-2012, 11:48 AM
Good video on comparisons of the various zeros:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iCNIRuQuBg

Al T.
10-29-2012, 12:32 PM
Interesting video. Sort of strange that he included both a 50 and a 200 yard zero.

Thanks!

Jay Cunningham
10-29-2012, 07:32 PM
The "50/200 zero" is a misnomer to me. IMO you either have a 50 yd. zero or you have a 200 yd. zero.

tanner
10-29-2012, 08:17 PM
The "50/200 zero" is a misnomer to me. IMO you either have a 50 yd. zero or you have a 200 yd. zero.

Not really... With a 50 yard near zero, you end up with a 200 yard far zero.

With the 50 yard zero, climbs to 50, hits a little high at 100 and then drops back down at 200. Right?

With a 200 yard near zero, it is still climbing till it hits 200 yards, so anything under 200 yards it will hit a bit low.

I could explain this better with a pen and paper, let me try to find a pic of what I am talking about online somewhere...

Jay Cunningham
10-29-2012, 08:22 PM
I understand what is occurring, I just don't agree that one should zero at 50 and call it "good" for 200.

Desmond82
10-29-2012, 08:25 PM
The "50/200 zero" is a misnomer to me. IMO you either have a 50 yd. zero or you have a 200 yd. zero.

Agreed

1118

- gun websites

1119

- Green Eyes, Black Rifle, Kyle Lamb, Viking Tactics, Inc. 2005


Top pic shows a 100 yard difference in effect range along with different points of impact (between 50 & 200 yards)

2. Bottom pic shows a more subtle difference in point of impact and approx. same effect range. (between 50 & 200 yards)

Could someone with knowledge weigh in on the conflicting info?

Edit: Apon further examination there no conflict just variables at play concerning POI's and the effect range difference is a matter of differing opinions due to hold over.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

tanner
10-29-2012, 08:28 PM
Now that I look at the video closer, I don't see how with the 300 yard zero a 25 yard shot ends up above the 300 yard shot.

This page was along what I was thinking though as far as "near" and "far" zero goes... I had to explain this concept to a Marine once. A Marine who has fought overseas. I guess they just do what they are told and don't have much concept as to how it works.

But then again I don't understand how that 300 yard zero works so who am I?


http://aesirtraining.com/home/rifle-zero/

Al T.
10-29-2012, 08:34 PM
I just don't agree that one should zero at 50 and call it "good" for 200.

Jay, you got that right. As Jack mentioned, you are zero'd at the range you shot your blaster at - not by extrapolation. Buddy of mine found out real fast that a 50y zero does not equal a 200y zero as his ammo sucked.

I was just surprised that Mr. Haley didn't roll the 50 into the 200.

tanner
10-29-2012, 08:35 PM
I understand what is occurring, I just don't agree that one should zero at 50 and call it "good" for 200.

Ah, okay. Well, I guess I can see how one would call it "good" though because if you are shooting at 200 yards with a 50 yard zero there is no elevation adjustment necessary.

I'm no military/leo sniper though. I'm just a "patrol rifle" kind of guy...

Desmond82
10-29-2012, 08:38 PM
Not really... With a 50 yard near zero, you end up with a 200 yard far zero.

With the 50 yard zero, climbs to 50, hits a little high at 100 and then drops back down at 200. Right?

With a 200 yard near zero, it is still climbing till it hits 200 yards, so anything under 200 yards it will hit a bit low.

I could explain this better with a pen and paper, let me try to find a pic of what I am talking about online somewhere...

What's an appropriate differential between a near and far zero?

Edit: Upon further research I understand the phrase near and far zero

And is the 50/200 zero 50yards and 200 meters?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Odin Bravo One
10-29-2012, 09:30 PM
As Jack mentioned, you are zero'd at the range you shot your blaster at - not by extrapolation.

You zero your rifle at the distance it is shot for zero. The rest is theoretical mathmatics. The issue is that theoretical math is that it is theoretical.

I see errors in the theoretical math day in and day out. The variables involved are too many to trust a chart or theory. Choose your zero distance. Go zero at that distance. Shoot at a variety of other distances.

Actually, do whatever you want.

iakdrago
10-29-2012, 09:51 PM
You zero your rifle at the distance it is shot for zero. The rest is theoretical mathmatics. The issue is that theoretical math is that it is theoretical.

I see errors in the theoretical math day in and day out. The variables involved are too many to trust a chart or theory. Choose your zero distance. Go zero at that distance. Shoot at a variety of other distances.

Actually, do whatever you want.

THIS. Should be the end to rifle zero. Confirm it at a set distance with set the set ammo. Understand that your zero is "set" for Conditions that you experienced during that day. Go practice with the set zero at various distances. Go practice again. Repeat the previous step untill you can't afford to practice anymore.

YVK
10-29-2012, 10:39 PM
And is the 50/200 zero 50yards and 200 meters?



I believe this is to be true, the 50 yards/200 meters or 50 yards/220 yards is the approximation, with absolutely correct answer being


You zero your rifle at the distance it is shot for zero. The rest is theoretical mathmatics. The issue is that theoretical math is that it is theoretical..

On a separate note, that mannequin's COM on Haley's video needs to be 2 inches higher, not sure why you'd want to shoot somebody in the stomach.

Failure2Stop
10-30-2012, 06:47 AM
You zero your rifle at the distance it is shot for zero. The rest is theoretical mathmatics. The issue is that theoretical math is that it is theoretical.

I see errors in the theoretical math day in and day out. The variables involved are too many to trust a chart or theory. Choose your zero distance. Go zero at that distance. Shoot at a variety of other distances.

Actually, do whatever you want.

I agree with every single word in this post.

Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.

Desmond82
10-30-2012, 11:37 AM
You zero your rifle at the distance it is shot for zero. The rest is theoretical mathmatics. The issue is that theoretical math is that it is theoretical.

I see errors in the theoretical math day in and day out. The variables involved are too many to trust a chart or theory. Choose your zero distance. Go zero at that distance. Shoot at a variety of other distances.

Actually, do whatever you want.

Since I posted the chart I assume you were directing your comments towards me. And there are several statements that you made that have me questioning my understanding and or your logic, so if you would please clarify some statements.


My understanding and or assumption of how the information gathered on the chart I posted (by Green Eyes, Black Rifle. Kyle Lamb Viking Tactics, Inc. 2005) was that it was established in a process similar to the video (previously posted by a member here) of Travis Haley in Adaptive Carbine; which I think we can all agree is an objective data result of POA/POI at varying zeros and distances based on the marksmanship of Mr. Haley. Making the math needed to create the bullet drop chart just simple addition and subtraction. So you lost me on the theoretical math errors statement.


My understanding of the purpose of the data from the video by Travis Haley, the chart I posted or even the Zen of the 100 Meter Zero by Jack Leuba is that the object data obtained could theoretically be duplicated with a margin of error due to variables like ammo, weapon system, marksmanship’s skill level, and weather conditions. I in turn was digesting this data to determine what zero would be right for my needs; which will include a trip to the Peace Marker Training Center in West Virginia to conduct my own data on POA/POI at my zero of choice and vary distances. I wasn’t going to blindly trust some else work with all the variables at play. Your point on zeroing at a distance and then shooting at a variety of distances is well taken but in the pursuit of getting the highest level of performance out of my rifle isn’t choosing a sound zeroing distance a key ingredient and perquisite for effective and efficient rifle manipulation/training? I ask this question because you statement “choose your zero distance,” as if were an arbitrary factor in this discussion.

Crow Hunter
10-30-2012, 03:37 PM
Since I posted the chart I assume you were directing your comments towards me. And there are several statements that you made that have me questioning my understanding and or your logic, so if you would please clarify some statements.


My understanding and or assumption of how the information gathered on the chart I posted (by Green Eyes, Black Rifle. Kyle Lamb Viking Tactics, Inc. 2005) was that it was established in a process similar to the video (previously posted by a member here) of Travis Haley in Adaptive Carbine; which I think we can all agree is an objective data result of POA/POI at varying zeros and distances based on the marksmanship of Mr. Haley. Making the math needed to create the bullet drop chart just simple addition and subtraction. So you lost me on the theoretical math errors statement.


My understanding of the purpose of the data from the video by Travis Haley, the chart I posted or even the Zen of the 100 Meter Zero by Jack Leuba is that the object data obtained could theoretically be duplicated with a margin of error due to variables like ammo, weapon system, marksmanship’s skill level, and weather conditions. I in turn was digesting this data to determine what zero would be right for my needs; which will include a trip to the Peace Marker Training Center in West Virginia to conduct my own data on POA/POI at my zero of choice and vary distances. I wasn’t going to blindly trust some else work with all the variables at play. Your point on zeroing at a distance and then shooting at a variety of distances is well taken but in the pursuit of getting the highest level of performance out of my rifle isn’t choosing a sound zeroing distance a key ingredient and perquisite for effective and efficient rifle manipulation/training? I ask this question because you statement “choose your zero distance,” as if were an arbitrary factor in this discussion.

I am not Sean, but I think what he is trying to say is you need to pick a distance that you want your rifle to hit exactly where you put the dot/crosshairs/front sight/etc that is most applicable for YOUR needs.

Then you will need to see where your rounds will hit at other distances, not rely on where they "should" hit based on a ballistic calculation.

So if you need your rounds to hit precisely POA/POI at 200 yards, zero at that point. Then shoot at a target a 25, 50, 75, 100, 150, etc and see where your personal weapon/ammo combo actually hits on that particular day.

This is what I do.

Of course, I could be completely off base.:D

Odin Bravo One
10-30-2012, 03:41 PM
No it was not directed at you. It was a generalized statement for anyone who looks at a chart or BC or other method of determining in-flight ballistics as gospel.

I say "choose your zero distance" because what you consider to be appropriate isn't necessarily what I consider appropriate. For me, I choose my zero based on maximum effective range of not only the trajectory, but also the terminal ballistics of the projectile selected, without hold overs or unders. I don't consider the 5.56 AR to be more than about a 250m gun under most circumstances. Some people think 300 is more appropriate. Other's firmly believe in a 100 zero. I've seen LE SWAT students who were stuck on a 7m zero. Determining zero distance is really a personal choice, and in civilian courses, most trainers put a good deal of time and effort into educating their students on the pro's and con's of various zero distances. Then you zero at the distance they recommend, based on their experience, and the remainder of their training plan revolves around this zero. Train with enough folks, and you will see various trends, and different schools of thought on the subject. I don't think any of them are wrong. Just different.

Ok, I lied............I do think the 7m zero is wrong.

I am still not the gear, guns, or tactics police, so I am not in any position to dictate to someone else what their needs are or are not. I can offer opinions, observations, and considerations, but I won't be at their fight, and the ultimate decisions lie with the user. There are limited times when I am the tactics, guns, gear police......and I do dictate what guys will and will not do. But that is a very small group of people, and even then, if there is a solid, well thought out, and understood reason to deviate......I'll generally let them deviate. But they need to understand the advantages/disadvantages, as well as the capabilities and limitations of their choice.

All shooters need to understand the advantages/disadvantages, as well as the capabilities and limitations of their choice.

The data in Kyle's book, Jeff Gonzales' book, and every other book, PDA, App, is all theoretical because it doesn't take into account ANY........no, not ANY outside variables or deviations from the EXACT set up used to gather that data. It also makes a lot of assumptions, such as bullet weight, barrel length, barrel twist, ballistic co-effecient, and velocity just to name a few. Fact is that there are differences from gun to gun, bullet to bullet. Even among guns built by the same manufacturer, there will be differences.

Example:There are charts that tell me that with a 200m zero, my bullet drop is 9" @ 300m. But when put into practice, the bullet drop is actually 14".

How is this possible? The chart, the PDA, the ballistic calculator, ALL say that the drop is 9".

Because something in the equation was not EXACTLY the same as the person recording this initial data.

Maybe I had a 14.5" barrel, and they used a 16" barrel. Or they used a 14.7" barrel, and I used a 12.5". Maybe they shot it un-suppressed and I shot suppressed. If they shot suppressed and I shot suppressed, chances are my suppressor is different. How many different barrel makers, suppressor makers are out there? Say we shot the same model suppressor? Maybe we used different attachment methods, one providing a tighter seal than the other? Perhaps we used the same suppressor and attachment method, perhaps my suppressor is not as used and abused? Or maybe it is more so?

I have watched 2 guns, same maker, same bullet, same suppressor, everything identical, have more than 150 fps deviation in muzzle velocity. That will change in flight ballistics, more drastically the further down range those bullets have to go.

We see this all the time when zeroing optics. Mathematically, I may need to apply 13 "clicks" left. But in fact, after applying those 13 clicks, I need to come back right 2. Why? Because NOTHING is perfectly true to the equation or formula used.

I also see it with Sniper guns all the time. Same gun. Same barrels. Same twist. Same length. Same chassis. Same scope. Same rings. Same ammo. Same lot #. Built by the same gunsmith.

Yet, comeups are different shooter to shooter, gun to gun at different ranges.

What about the chart for M855 Green Tip? "I have green tip, and using a 16" barrel, just like so and so did to gather this data."

Well, where did that green tip come from? Surplus?

No.

The US Military has been at war for 10 years, and is consuming ammunition at record rates. There is NO SURPLUS. What is available for sale is rejected by the Government for issue to the troops. Why? I don't know. A variety of reasons. But it isn't MilSpec, which means it isn't to ANY Spec. There are no known's with "surplus" Green Tip. It is safe to shoot, and that's about all that is known.

We use the charts, PDA's, App's, books, data, etc., to give us an IDEA of what kind of results we can expect to have, but we cannot rely on this as an indisputable FACT. We have to get out and shoot our gun, with our optic, and our accessories, with our ammo, to find out what OUR collection/combination actually does.

I choose my zero distance, and go get my zero. Then I shoot at various ranges from 0-25 to 100 beyond my zero range (for a GP carbine), and create my own data. Then I log it into my DOPE log/DOPE book. There is a reason that Sniper's use a DOPE book religiously, or breacher's keep charge data in their charge books religiously. Because it provides a foundation, and keeps information available to give expected results, based on previous engagements, with the exact gear/configuration in use to get the data.

I keep the chart that Kyle has in his book, along with some from AMU, and some from David Tubb's, along with my PDA/Ballistic Calculator, and my iPhone App's with me every single time I am on the range. Because I believe they are an invaluable tool for telling me what I "should" expect in terms of down range results. But when it doesn't happen that way, I don't get angry, or throw away the chart, or dismiss it as worthless. Far from it. But it is not the end all be all, and does not provide me a 100% solution. Getting out and shooting my gun, my ammo, my optic gives me about a 95% solution. The other 5% comes from shooting in all environments, in all conditions, and continuing to shoot at the various ranges I can expect to need my equipment to perform.

I have had guns, ammo, optics combinations that shot pretty close to previously established data from other shooters. Actually, most have. But every once in awhile, I have had guns not anywhere close.

Dropkick
10-30-2012, 03:51 PM
Actually, do whatever you want.
I don't know if this was your intent, but that sentence gave me a really good laugh.

And I didn't realize that the youtube video would cause such a stir, I just found it thought provoking.

fuse
10-30-2012, 07:59 PM
The T. Haley video is great, in that he shows how many potential options there are when choosing a zero, and then shows them on a humanoid target. It is just meant to show you generally what you may be able to expect, as Sean said. I saw it when pantaeo first released it, at a time when I was much more new to this stuff, and my mind was blown. In a great way.

Sean's massive post above definitely makes this forum's 'greatest hits'.

Jay Cunningham
10-30-2012, 08:09 PM
III. A note about SMEs

Select members of the pistol-forum.com community have been granted the title Subject Matter Expert (SME). These are individuals with proven credentials within the community who directly influence firearms-related policy decisions for high profile law enforcement, military, and/or industry entities. These professionals are often highly compensated for their time and expertise, and pistol-forum.com greatly appreciates their generous participation here. As such, forum members are expected to treat all such SMEs with appropriate respect and deference.

Odin Bravo One
10-30-2012, 08:18 PM
I don't know if this was your intent, but that sentence gave me a really good laugh.

Yeah, kind of.......people tend to get wound a little tight sometimes...........

ETA: There are a lot of different theories, and schools of thought on the topic of zero. Just because one or two don't fit what I or you or someone else does, doesn't mean it is wrong. It's just different. Even among people with similar backgrounds, you will have different opinions on what's what.

Keeping an open mind is the only way to continue to learn. Better yet, try multiple methods so that you can be well versed as to your own reasons why you do what you do.

Sometimes I come off as an asshole. It's not personal. I was born this way and just grew bigger.

Desmond82
10-30-2012, 09:49 PM
No it was not directed at you. It was a generalized statement for anyone who looks at a chart or BC or other method of determining in-flight ballistics as gospel.

I say "choose your zero distance" because what you consider to be appropriate isn't necessarily what I consider appropriate. For me, I choose my zero based on maximum effective range of not only the trajectory, but also the terminal ballistics of the projectile selected, without hold overs or unders. I don't consider the 5.56 AR to be more than about a 250m gun under most circumstances. Some people think 300 is more appropriate. Other's firmly believe in a 100 zero. I've seen LE SWAT students who were stuck on a 7m zero. Determining zero distance is really a personal choice, and in civilian courses, most trainers put a good deal of time and effort into educating their students on the pro's and con's of various zero distances. Then you zero at the distance they recommend, based on their experience, and the remainder of their training plan revolves around this zero. Train with enough folks, and you will see various trends, and different schools of thought on the subject. I don't think any of them are wrong. Just different.

Ok, I lied............I do think the 7m zero is wrong.

I am still not the gear, guns, or tactics police, so I am not in any position to dictate to someone else what their needs are or are not. I can offer opinions, observations, and considerations, but I won't be at their fight, and the ultimate decisions lie with the user. There are limited times when I am the tactics, guns, gear police......and I do dictate what guys will and will not do. But that is a very small group of people, and even then, if there is a solid, well thought out, and understood reason to deviate......I'll generally let them deviate. But they need to understand the advantages/disadvantages, as well as the capabilities and limitations of their choice.

All shooters need to understand the advantages/disadvantages, as well as the capabilities and limitations of their choice.

The data in Kyle's book, Jeff Gonzales' book, and every other book, PDA, App, is all theoretical because it doesn't take into account ANY........no, not ANY outside variables or deviations from the EXACT set up used to gather that data. It also makes a lot of assumptions, such as bullet weight, barrel length, barrel twist, ballistic co-effecient, and velocity just to name a few. Fact is that there are differences from gun to gun, bullet to bullet. Even among guns built by the same manufacturer, there will be differences.

Example:There are charts that tell me that with a 200m zero, my bullet drop is 9" @ 300m. But when put into practice, the bullet drop is actually 14".

How is this possible? The chart, the PDA, the ballistic calculator, ALL say that the drop is 9".

Because something in the equation was not EXACTLY the same as the person recording this initial data.

Maybe I had a 14.5" barrel, and they used a 16" barrel. Or they used a 14.7" barrel, and I used a 12.5". Maybe they shot it un-suppressed and I shot suppressed. If they shot suppressed and I shot suppressed, chances are my suppressor is different. How many different barrel makers, suppressor makers are out there? Say we shot the same model suppressor? Maybe we used different attachment methods, one providing a tighter seal than the other? Perhaps we used the same suppressor and attachment method, perhaps my suppressor is not as used and abused? Or maybe it is more so?

I have watched 2 guns, same maker, same bullet, same suppressor, everything identical, have more than 150 fps deviation in muzzle velocity. That will change in flight ballistics, more drastically the further down range those bullets have to go.

We see this all the time when zeroing optics. Mathematically, I may need to apply 13 "clicks" left. But in fact, after applying those 13 clicks, I need to come back right 2. Why? Because NOTHING is perfectly true to the equation or formula used.

I also see it with Sniper guns all the time. Same gun. Same barrels. Same twist. Same length. Same chassis. Same scope. Same rings. Same ammo. Same lot #. Built by the same gunsmith.

Yet, comeups are different shooter to shooter, gun to gun at different ranges.

What about the chart for M855 Green Tip? "I have green tip, and using a 16" barrel, just like so and so did to gather this data."

Well, where did that green tip come from? Surplus?

No.

The US Military has been at war for 10 years, and is consuming ammunition at record rates. There is NO SURPLUS. What is available for sale is rejected by the Government for issue to the troops. Why? I don't know. A variety of reasons. But it isn't MilSpec, which means it isn't to ANY Spec. There are no known's with "surplus" Green Tip. It is safe to shoot, and that's about all that is known.

We use the charts, PDA's, App's, books, data, etc., to give us an IDEA of what kind of results we can expect to have, but we cannot rely on this as an indisputable FACT. We have to get out and shoot our gun, with our optic, and our accessories, with our ammo, to find out what OUR collection/combination actually does.

I choose my zero distance, and go get my zero. Then I shoot at various ranges from 0-25 to 100 beyond my zero range (for a GP carbine), and create my own data. Then I log it into my DOPE log/DOPE book. There is a reason that Sniper's use a DOPE book religiously, or breacher's keep charge data in their charge books religiously. Because it provides a foundation, and keeps information available to give expected results, based on previous engagements, with the exact gear/configuration in use to get the data.

I keep the chart that Kyle has in his book, along with some from AMU, and some from David Tubb's, along with my PDA/Ballistic Calculator, and my iPhone App's with me every single time I am on the range. Because I believe they are an invaluable tool for telling me what I "should" expect in terms of down range results. But when it doesn't happen that way, I don't get angry, or throw away the chart, or dismiss it as worthless. Far from it. But it is not the end all be all, and does not provide me a 100% solution. Getting out and shooting my gun, my ammo, my optic gives me about a 95% solution. The other 5% comes from shooting in all environments, in all conditions, and continuing to shoot at the various ranges I can expect to need my equipment to perform.

I have had guns, ammo, optics combinations that shot pretty close to previously established data from other shooters. Actually, most have. But every once in awhile, I have had guns not anywhere close.

First of all thank you for the well thought out post addressing my questions and comments. It will take some time to digest it all.

I also seen noticed one member referring to this back and forth discourse as a “stir”, and a staff member sited forum rules regarding respect and deference to site S.M.E’s. I didn’t detect in your response you felt that I somehow disrespected you but too clear the air I would like to whole heartily apologize if you took offense to any of my previous statements. I often times find that humor and or tone can be hard to articulate in writing and quickly misconstrued as something negative. I have frequented this forum long enough to develop a fondness to the due to the treasure trove of quality information, people, and professional and friendly discourse. I by no means, mean to rub anyone on here the wrong way. I meant to challenge your statements like a student challenges a teacher to bring about a better understanding of your knowledge and logic.

Odin Bravo One
10-30-2012, 10:58 PM
Gotta squeeze me harder than that for my skin to crawl. I don't take anything on the internet personal, and know all too well how written word gets misconstrued. Didn't take any offense whatsoever.

Seriously, the best way to go about it is to go find your zero needs, and zero there. Then shoot at other distances, and log that info into your DOPE Book. We shoot zero, and apply DOPE.

Many don't realize the difference between the two, or that there even is a difference. Zero is zero, POA/POI at the distance prescribed. DOPE.......is an acronym. Data of Previous Engagements. This is the info you find yourself, and log in. Then you can apply it to circumstances you face on the range, or during the next engagement.

TCinVA
10-31-2012, 07:41 AM
Sean's comments are dead on...and believe it or not that knowledge isn't universal.

I know of a situation where a qualified sniper was basically booted off a SWAT team because he insisted that command's idea that a bunch of different "sniper qualified" guys use one rifle was fruity as hell. They didn't understand the concept of a zero or a dope book or how a bunch of highly technical details mattered when you expect a guy to take a CNS shot on a dude holding a gun to a child's head.

The same principles apply to every rifle/ammo/gear combination: You have to know yours.

Personally I stick to the 100 yard zero because it's easy to find a place to shoot 100 yards and it's highly unlikely I'm going to be using the rifle for serious social purposes further than that. Works for me.

rob_s
11-01-2012, 08:14 PM
I understand what is occurring, I just don't agree that one should zero at 50 and call it "good" for 200.

Exactly right. I always wonder how many of these people with phantom zeros ever bothered to check them at the far, or true, zero distance they think they have.

I still maintain that the concept of the 50 yard initial intersection is only as popular as it is because its the shortest distance one can get POI=POA and still consider themselves tactically acceptable. This theory is void of you have actually gone out to 200 and achieved a true zero.

Al T.
11-02-2012, 09:17 AM
phantom zeros

Rob, consider that stolen. :cool:

IMHO, the military adopted the practice of close range zeroing for economic reasons. It works for them as the rifle and ammunition combination is (generally) a constant. Add in that any hit is a good hit (on a too generous target, IMHO) for qualification and they can get away with that.

In the case I mentioned, one of my buddies was jocking up to go to carbine class. His 50 yard zero tanked at 200 yards. If he had failed to shoot his carbine/ammo/optic combination at 200y, he would have wasted his time and money. By actually shooting he was able to ID his deficiency.

On the other hand, with the wide swath of carbines/ammo/optics available to us today, we change up many of the constants. My ammo is not M855 and that may change my POA/POI from what I would expect, especially based on a ballistic chart from a book.

JMS
11-02-2012, 01:00 PM
adopted the practice of close range zeroing for economic reasons.

Yes, primarily as a means of saving time/rounds prior to conducting the no-kidding zero process, not as a wholesale replacement of the procedure. OR, as an imperfect alternative to be used when time/space to conduct the correct procedure does not exist.

These methods are still entitled "Field-Expedient Zero" in the pubs, though there are instances in which the word "zero" is left out entirely on the offhand chance of discouraging those afflicted with Brig-Lawyer Syndrome ("...it SAYS 'zero' right THERE..."), and the urge to half-step their way through life, from replacing an actual zeroing process with the short-range methods. This is on the Corps side of the house, don't know about Army or other organizations, but some publications where the field-expedient methods will now read "XYZ m/yd Grouping Exercise" are gonna become more common. I think it's "happy vs. glad" nonsense, but nobody asked me at the time, either, so... :p

The "shooters" of these institutions recognize the BS of confusing a field-expediant method as the real thing, but getting that to trickle down to 2nd spear-carrier from the left isn't easy.

rob_s
11-05-2012, 05:45 AM
These methods are still entitled "Field-Expedient Zero" in the pubs, though there are instances in which the word "zero" is left out entirely on the offhand chance of discouraging those afflicted with Brig-Lawyer Syndrome ("...it SAYS 'zero' right THERE..."), and the urge to half-step their way through life, from replacing an actual zeroing process with the short-range methods. This is on the Corps side of the house, don't know about Army or other organizations, but some publications where the field-expedient methods will now read "XYZ m/yd Grouping Exercise" are gonna become more common. I think it's "happy vs. glad" nonsense, but nobody asked me at the time, either, so... :p.

I think that's fantastic. It's an initial intersection, or at best a "near zero", not a "50 yard zero".

Failure2Stop
11-05-2012, 12:43 PM
I think that's fantastic. It's an initial intersection, or at best a "near zero", not a "50 yard zero".

Rob, I'm a bit interested where this comes from. For as long as I have been a rifle shooter any distance at which one has a definitive point of impact in known relation to point of aim, with no environmental effect, has been referred to as a "zero".
So one could have a point of aim/point of impact intersection at 7 yards, which would be a "7 yard zero", or conversely, point of impact being 3" above point of aim at 100 meters, which would be a " 3" high at 100 meter zero".
The argument in the Corps was about what a "BZO" (battle sight zero) entailed. Really, it's a 300 meter zero, which theoretically permits a shooter to hit human sized targets from muzzle to 350 meters without holding off. This morphed into a 300 yard zero, since the vast majority of KD ranges are in yards, and most US shooters think in yards, not meters (though this is slowly but steadily changing). To prepare shooters for zeroing at 300, an initial shoot at 36 yards (for 20" barrels shooting M855) would be done to "get on paper" at 300. Somehow, the 36 yard shoot got instilled as "BZO ing" at an institutional level. In reality, it is a method to prepare the shooter for the "real zero/BZO", or to get "close enough" should something happen to cause loss of zero. In this instance, the "field expedient BZO" is not a BZO, but rather a 36 yard zero.

Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.

rob_s
11-05-2012, 02:53 PM
Rob, I'm a bit interested where this comes from. For as long as I have been a rifle shooter any distance at which one has a definitive point of impact in known relation to point of aim, with no environmental effect, has been referred to as a "zero".
So one could have a point of aim/point of impact intersection at 7 yards, which would be a "7 yard zero", or conversely, point of impact being 3" above point of aim at 100 meters, which would be a " 3" high at 100 meter zero".
The argument in the Corps was about what a "BZO" (battle sight zero) entailed. Really, it's a 300 meter zero, which theoretically permits a shooter to hit human sized targets from muzzle to 350 meters without holding off. This morphed into a 300 yard zero, since the vast majority of KD ranges are in yards, and most US shooters think in yards, not meters (though this is slowly but steadily changing). To prepare shooters for zeroing at 300, an initial shoot at 36 yards (for 20" barrels shooting M855) would be done to "get on paper" at 300. Somehow, the 36 yard shoot got instilled as "BZO ing" at an institutional level. In reality, it is a method to prepare the shooter for the "real zero/BZO", or to get "close enough" should something happen to cause loss of zero. In this instance, the "field expedient BZO" is not a BZO, but rather a 36 yard zero.

Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.

After the multiple shitstorms that ensued on M4C discussing this, I don't really see the point. When those discussions happened I was able to use google to find explanations of what I was trying to get across, but which people were too busy debating the person and not the topic and too busy getting worked up that something they previously held to be true may not be so, to make it worthwhile even to post those links at the time, or bother looking for them now.

I will, however, say that I think that your description in the second paragraph is largely what led people to the colloquialism that passes for technical terminology today. Combined with many people who's only (or at least, initial and long-term) familiarity with shooting has come from military service.

In either case, I think it's hard to debate the usefulness of having a different term for near- and far-zeros, even if we have to call them "purple dinosaur" and "yellow bird" (respectively) just to make people feel better, and would help to avoid the confusion altogether.

MD7305
09-17-2014, 12:07 PM
Holy Moses!!!, this is an old thread but seemed the most appropriate place for my question. I have some carbine (AR/AK) experience but I know very little and have only very basic training with carbines. I recently built a new carbine; DD mid upper a/Troy Alpha, DD BUIS, EOTech 512 on top of a Spikes complete lower. My initial zero was done at 25 yards due to range limitations. Everything was great, irons and EOTech we're making cloverleaf groups. So today I went to a 200yd range to adjust/verify my zero after adding a YHM 1/3rd riser to the 512. I started at 50yds and my rounds were hitting high, right (think top right corner of a 8.5x11 sheet of paper). I worked both irons and EOTech back to center. I stopped at 50yds because I had a bunch of questions and didn't want to waste my ammo. So here are my questions regarding factors that effect zero. Would these factors have such a great effect on the difference in zero? I fully expected it to widen due to distance and the riser but not such a pronounced change. Nothing was touched between both zeroes except adding the riser.

-My original zero was done prone and second was from a bench.
-Not sure if stock was collapsed at the same length each time?
-Riser seemed solid and tight, is it junk or a weak link?
-Ammo: XM193 first time, Federal bulk 55gr. today. Velocity related?
-Doofus behind the trigger. Put the carbine down and stick to pistols?

Any suggestions welcome.

Jay Cunningham
09-17-2014, 12:25 PM
Understand that the "50/200" zero is not exactly that.

You need to pick something and keep it consistent first.

My recommendation is to pick the bench, pick the fully extended stock, pick one ammo type, and pick your EoTech with the illumination adjusted down so that you can barely see it.

Get back on a target at 25 yards. You can zero however you like eventually, but you need to tighten it up at 25. I use a rough zero of hitting 1.5" low at 25 to get me rough zeroed at 100.

Work on keeping a constant body position behind the gun on the bench. Employ breath control and center up the dot in the optic (yes they're supposed to be parallax free, but we're tweaking stuff here).

To be honest, all of the things you mentioned should only make a small bit of difference.

Jay Cunningham
09-17-2014, 12:28 PM
Also... are you sure you're using the right riser?

I went back an re-read your post... you changed a lot of variables. You need to re-zero.

rob_s
09-17-2014, 12:33 PM
Holy Moses!!!, this is an old thread but seemed the most appropriate place for my question. I have some carbine (AR/AK) experience but I know very little and have only very basic training with carbines. I recently built a new carbine; DD mid upper a/Troy Alpha, DD BUIS, EOTech 512 on top of a Spikes complete lower. My initial zero was done at 25 yards due to range limitations. Everything was great, irons and EOTech we're making cloverleaf groups. So today I went to a 200yd range to adjust/verify my zero after adding a YHM 1/3rd riser to the 512. I started at 50yds and my rounds were hitting high, right (think top right corner of a 8.5x11 sheet of paper). I worked both irons and EOTech back to center. I stopped at 50yds because I had a bunch of questions and didn't want to waste my ammo. So here are my questions regarding factors that effect zero. Would these factors have such a great effect on the difference in zero? I fully expected it to widen due to distance and the riser but not such a pronounced change. Nothing was touched between both zeroes except adding the riser.

-My original zero was done prone and second was from a bench.
-Not sure if stock was collapsed at the same length each time?
-Riser seemed solid and tight, is it junk or a weak link?
-Ammo: XM193 first time, Federal bulk 55gr. today. Velocity related?
-Doofus behind the trigger. Put the carbine down and stick to pistols?

Any suggestions welcome.


if I'm reading this right, you got a near-zero at 25 yards with an Eotech mounted directly to the flattop, then installed a YHM riser, went and shot at 5o yards and found that your groups were both high and right of your point of aim?

If so, there are two components here...
(1) the bullet is traveling upward, relative to your line of sight, as it impacts the target at 25 yards. It will still be traveling upwards at 50 yards, meaning it will hit high.
(2) changing the mounting can affect the lateral point of aim (the bullet still travels in the same path) even if the literature all says it won't.

Other factors include basic geometry (a .25" shift to the right at 25 yards may be invisible but will start to show up as a .50" shift at 50, 1" shift at 100, and 2" shift at 200), and the fact that this is why we shoot to the distances, not rely on the theory. Will a 2" deviation at 200 mean you miss the steel? No. But if you're trying to shoot a group at 200 on paper you can see the shift.

joshs
09-17-2014, 12:37 PM
-My original zero was done prone and second was from a bench. Changing positions can affect zero, especially with irons or an optic at a distance other than the parallax is set for.

-Not sure if stock was collapsed at the same length each time? Same as above, anything that changes your eye's relationship to the sights/optic can affect zero.

-Riser seemed solid and tight, is it junk or a weak link? Maybe, but the best way to find out is to get the a good zero and see if there is any shift over time. Ensure that the connections are properly to torqued and mark with a paint pen so you'll see if there is any movement in the screw/s.

-Ammo: XM193 first time, Federal bulk 55gr. today. Velocity related? Changing ammo, even lot to lot of the same ammo, can affect zero.

-Doofus behind the trigger. Put the carbine down and stick to pistols? I think it's very possible that all of the above could have led to the shift that you saw. You'll normally be a little high at 50 with a 25 yard zero; add in all of the changes you made, and the shift could easily be explained away. I'd try to get a new zero, shoot for a bit, and then recheck zero from the same position to eliminate any variables.

Dave J
09-17-2014, 12:37 PM
Nothing was touched between both zeroes except adding the riser.

To me, that alone represents a very significant change, and I'm not surprised you saw a very noticeable shift.


-Ammo: XM193 first time, Federal bulk 55gr. today. Velocity related?

Not surprising to couple MOA worth of change there as well. Individual rifles vary with how much they'll shift between different loads.

FWIW, I've also seen EoTechs shift zero seemingly of their own accord...not a lot, but a few clicks difference from week to week wouldn't surprise me, especially if the rifle's been beaten around a bit.

JMS
09-17-2014, 12:50 PM
Jay effectively said what I was typing out, the action of dismounting your optic and adding the riser effectively taking you back to Square One, regardless of by how much your POI shifted. You were gonna see some differences, and the fact that there's something like 6 variables present in what you just got through posting...

Put your initial effort out of your head, it's irrelevant, at this point.

If you're not eliminating as many variables as you can, you're injecting variables into an exercise where variables are unwelcome. Follow Jay's words in this regard; zeroing is largely administrative in nature, and it's worth treating it as such...though there's no need to go down the rabbit-hole over it, like the bench-rest competitors do. (Which is not a bust on the bench-resters; the high level of precision and attention to detail they go through in zeroing feeds directly in to their intended usage.)

Going from 25yd to 50, you're POI would have been a bit high even if you'd not made a drastic equipment change....but you did. The equipment change AND the 3-4 other conditions that may or may not have altered from your initial effort all came together as one, in this instance. Simplest to just start over.

A greater understanding of the external ballistics of the various most-popular zeros would be a worthwhile endeavor. Just about anything Molon's ever posted is very worthwhile reading: http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?65679-AR-15-Zeros-and-Trajectories

Suvorov
09-17-2014, 05:11 PM
For what it is worth, I have stopped zeroing my rifles from the bench. I have found that I get quite a bit of difference between my POI on a 100 yard zero shot from a bench and a 100 yard zero I shoot from prone (about 3-4 inches) simply because I mount the rifle differently when I'm laying down and when I'm sitting. Whatever theoretical improvement in stability and precision I gain from the bench is lost when I change to shooting from positions and since I seldom shoot from the bench and would not have a bench in the field (whether it be matches, goblins, or alien invasion), it does me no good to zero from the bench. The bench to prone zero shift resulted in a mostly vertical change in POI. I would also notice a windage POI shift from time to time that was due to me canting the rifle differently from the bench to prone. To eliminate this I now shoot with my front sight post up as by making sure the dot or reticle is centered above my front sight post - I eliminate any cant I may be inducing.

As the others have mentioned, your installing the riser and changing ammo were huge variable changes that would result in you needing to re-zero, but it is wise to also take shooting position into account.

HCM
09-17-2014, 06:23 PM
FWIW, I've also seen EoTechs shift zero seemingly of their own accord...not a lot, but a few clicks difference from week to week wouldn't surprise me, especially if the rifle's been beaten around a bit.

This has been my experience with our EO-Tech 552s at work, especially if they are knocking around in a lock box in a vehicle. We run them directly on the rail with the small screw, Lock Tite and witness marks. I would also recommend lithium AAs for your 512.

MD7305
09-17-2014, 07:48 PM
Thanks for the advice gents. I had a Primary Arms red dot on the carbine for little while as a temporary optic until I found something more appropriate. I had no issues with it but I initially zeroed at 25yds, prone. I think today I had too many variables going on. I'm going to start fresh next time out and make a note to mark my stock position, stick to prone, and stick with XM193. I know zero is a debated issue, at least distance. I usually do a 25yd zero with POA about 1.5" above POI as Jay mentioned earlier. This is mainly due to my departments range being limited to 25yds. This time out I was going for a 50yd zero, with really no justification other than curiosity. You guys made several points I hadn't considered so thanks again.

Jay Cunningham
09-17-2014, 07:55 PM
Once you're settled in, please don't overlook tightening down and putting thread locker on stuff.

Molon
09-17-2014, 08:45 PM
A good zero is vital to rifle shooting -- whats the best option for a general use carbine (16 inch, irons/1x red dot), and how do we get there?




AR-15 Zeros and Trajectories


The 100 yard zero with a .223/5.56mm AR-15 carbine is a unique trajectory in that the bullet just “kisses” the line of sight at 100 yards and rides along it for approximately 10 yards before dropping back down below the line of sight. (Technically, the bullet does travel above the line of sight, but by only 0.010”; a fraction of the diameter of the bullet itself.)



http://www.box.net/shared/static/l5orbycc2z.jpg



For all other zeroing schemes, there are going to be two points were the bullet crosses the line of sight; the near-zero and the far-zero. For the near-zero, the bullet will cross the line of sight while traveling upward form the muzzle toward the apogee or “maximum ordinate,” its highest point of travel. For the far-zero, the bullet will cross the line of sight while traveling downward from the maximum ordinate.

Now, when assigning a name to a particular zeroing scheme, it would be helpful if that name gave descriptive information about that particular zero; that is, the name should give us information about the trajectory and how it is unique and differs from other trajectories.

As a point of reference, the Santose Improved Battlesight Zero is often referred to as a 50/200 yard zero, however this is incorrect. It is actually a 50 yard/200 meter zeroing scheme; and this is only with a very few particular combinations of bullet weight, barrel length/muzzle velocity and height of sights above the bore. As an example, a 20” barreled AR-15 A2 firing 62 grain M855 will not match the 50 yard/200 meter IBZ. Neither will a 16" barreled RECCE firing 77 grain MK262, nor a 14.5” barreled M4 carbine firing the 70 grain 5.56mm Optimized "Brown Tip" load. The same concept applies when people refer to a 50/225 yard zero. Only a very few specific combinations of bullet weight, barrel length/muzzle velocity and height of sights above the bore will match that description.

What this is all leading up to is this; except for a very few specific combinations of bullet weight, barrel length/muzzle velocity and height of sights above the bore, a 50 yard zero is a different zero than a 200 yard zero. For a 200 yard zero, we know that this trajectory will produce a far-zero in which the bullet will cross the line of sight at 200 yards in its downward travel from the maximum ordinate. (It is physically impossible to produce a 200 yard near-zero with any of the commonly available loads and barrels lengths used in .223/5.56mm AR-15s.) Other than for a very few specific combinations of bullet weight, barrel length/muzzle velocity and height of sights above the bore, the near-zero of the 200 yard zero will not be at 50 yards.

Conversely, a 50 yard zero tells us that this trajectory will have a near-zero in which the bullet crosses the line of sight at a distance of 50 yards in its upward travel to the maximum ordinate. For those who think that a zeroing scheme must be named after its far-zero, it is physically impossible to produce a far-zero of 50 yards with any of the commonly used loads and barrel lengths in .223/5.56mm AR-15s. The 50 yard zero can only be the near-zero.

Other than for a very few specific combinations of bullet weight, barrel length/muzzle velocity and height of sights above the bore, the far-zero of the 50 yard zero will not be at 200 yards; and for all practical purposes it matters not one bit. Whether the bullet crosses the line of sight for the second time (far-zero) at 189 yards, 200 yards, 215 yards or 225 yards will not make the slightest bit of difference in the practical application of the AR-15 as a defensive weapon. In each case we will be holding the same POA (beyond CQB distances) and know that we will be hitting within approximately 2 inches above or below that POA out to 200 yards (or farther depending upon barrel length and load.) You should have an idea what your actual far-zero is when using a 50 yard zero and confirm such at distance when possible, but again it’s most likely not going to be a 200 yard far-zero and again it does not need to be.

Choose your zeroing scheme based on the pertinent facts; not nonsense about “shooting through a cone.” When shooting at human targets, in the grand scheme of things there isn’t going to be any practical difference between a point of impact that has a negative deviation from the point of aim, (e.g. the bullet strikes 1.5” below the point of aim) and a point of impact that has an equal positive deviation from the point of aim (e.g. the bullet strikes 1.5” above the point of aim.) In other words, the absolute value of the point of impact from the point of aim (how far the point of impact deviates from the point of aim, regardless of whether it is a positive or negative deviation) is what we need to be concerned about. Therefore, one of the main points to consider when choosing a battle-sight-zero is this: What zeroing scheme produces the smallest absolute values for the deviations of the points of impact from the point of aim, over the distance that we reasonably expect to engage a human target in our intended usage?

The chart below illustrates the above concept. The chart compares the absolute values of the deviations of the points of impact from the point of aim (0.0 inches on the graph being the point of aim/line of sight) for a 50-yard-zero and a 100-yard-zero, using Hornady 5.56 TAP T2 ammunition.


http://www.box.com/shared/static/dff892e7179fa7e265a7.jpg


As you can see in the graph above, from the muzzle (0 yards) to approximately 62 yards, the 50-yard-zero has a slight advantage over the 100-yard-zero. Between the distances of 62 yards and 165 yards, the 100-yard-zero has the advantage. From the distance of 165 yards out to the 250 yards shown in the graph, the 50-yard-zero has a distinct advantage over the 100-yard-zero. Choose your zeroing scheme based on the pertinent facts.




Some reference material. Except where noted, all barrel lengths are 20 inches


http://www.box.net/shared/static/xuhqpttxnv.jpg
Courtesy of zrxc77





M855 25 yard zero

http://www.box.net/shared/static/cednvi8d7o.jpg





M855 25 meter zero

http://www.box.net/shared/static/f2aede6t0d.jpg




M855

http://www.box.net/shared/static/mni5s9tkr6.jpg





M855 and M193 50 yard zero from 16” barrel

http://www.box.net/shared/static/8xved8kfrm.jpg





M193 25 meter, 50 yard and 100 yard zeros from 16" barrel

http://www.box.net/shared/static/c0dvpkdudy.jpg




100 yard zero

http://www.box.net/shared/static/gh6i3193lr.jpg






M855 200 meter vs 300 meter zeros

http://www.box.net/shared/static/x8ekjyj6av.jpg



....

JMS
09-17-2014, 10:33 PM
^^Molon's immediate above is precisely the info I cited, RE: info on types of zero.

General observation: A key portion of it is often glossed over by a lot of folks who falsely claim to understand basic zeros, largely because they fail to shake the misguided idea of "yards and meters are the same thing," or analogues thereof...

Bolded portion is my emphasis:


As a point of reference, the Santose Improved Battlesight Zero is often referred to as a 50/200 yard zero, however this is incorrect. It is actually a 50 yard/200 meter zeroing scheme; and this is only with a very few particular combinations of bullet weight, barrel length/muzzle velocity and height of sights above the bore. As an example, a 20” barreled AR-15 A2 firing 62 grain M855 will not match the 50 yard/200 meter IBZ. Neither will a 16" barreled RECCE firing 77 grain MK262, nor a 14.5” barreled M4 carbine firing the 70 grain 5.56mm Optimized "Brown Tip" load. The same concept applies when people refer to a 50/225 yard zero. Only a very few specific combinations of bullet weight, barrel length/muzzle velocity and height of sights above the bore will match that description.

What this is all leading up to is this; except for a very few specific combinations of bullet weight, barrel length/muzzle velocity and height of sights above the bore, a 50 yard zero is a different zero than a 200 yard zero.

100 yards is 100 yards. 100 meters, however, is 109 yards and change; over 27' of difference. Most of the difference between a 15yd pistol target and a 25yd pistol target, which gives all kinds of folks all manner of troubles....

I don't have enough ink in my pen to describe all the troubles we had with USMC RCOs that were zeroed @ 100yd, and the Marines insisting that the optic was a POS because the BDC aimpoints at further distances (an ACOG BDC is graduated in meters) didn't match their zeros. Well, no #$%, Brain Trust....

Point being, if one doesn't know how to, or outright REFUSES to, convert between metric and imperial....select the one supported by one's available facility and stick with it. Doesn't apply directly to MD's troubles, but may help in terms of general background info for others also trying to get a handle on things.

joshs
09-17-2014, 11:01 PM
Since we're talking different zeros, one thing I never really considered until I took F2S's carbine class, was how different zeros affect trajectory when then gun in on it's side (SBU/rollover prone). Because the 200/300 yard/meter zeros have more "UP" elevation, when gravity is not acting against the "UP" direction (when the carbine is turned 90 degrees on its side), they tend to deviate from PoA much more quickly than a 100 yard/meter zero.

rob_s
09-18-2014, 05:52 AM
Since we're talking different zeros, one thing I never really considered until I took F2S's carbine class, was how different zeros affect trajectory when then gun in on it's side (SBU/rollover prone). Because the 200/300 yard/meter zeros have more "UP" elevation, when gravity is not acting against the "UP" direction (when the carbine is turned 90 degrees on its side), they tend to deviate from PoA much more quickly than a 100 yard/meter zero.

Out of curiosity, was this demonstrated somehow, or discussed as theory ?

For quote some time I was planning on hitting the range with a bipod. It takes to the 9 o'clock rail to play with checking POI.

joshs
09-18-2014, 08:44 AM
Out of curiosity, was this demonstrated somehow, or discussed as theory ?

Mostly discussed, but we shot on vertical 3x5 cards at 75 yards from rollover to demonstrate the lack of deviation from PoA using a 100 meter zero. F2S allowed people to keep a 50 meter zero, but everyone in the class I took zeroed at 100m so there was no example in class of the alternatives. I've since confirmed it on my own using a 300 yard zero. I know use 100 meter/yard zeros as long as the optic I'm using has some type holdover reticle feature. With irons or other optics I use 50 and then try to confirm the long intersection when able.

iakdrago
02-13-2015, 01:37 PM
Don't want to beat a dead horse, a lot of great info in here that i have copied and pasted into a word document. I have a question on body position when zeroing. So far, i have been using the prone position for zeroing my Ar. When shooting of the bench, i do notice a POI shift when my body is upright, as opposed to horizontal. My best educated guess is that it has to do with a change in the distance of my eye to the rear sight between the two positions. Recently, I was invited to participate in a "woods walk" on a wooded property with targets set at various locations. In none of the "engagements" i found myself using the prone position, nor would it have been very viable (South East PA). Most of the time i was either A) Standing or B) Squating with using a tree as a barricade brace whenever possible. This led me to reconsider my "prone" method of zeroing my sights--should i be zeroing of the bench where my body is more vertical and the rifle orientation resembles that of a standing/squatting position?

breakingtime91
02-16-2015, 03:04 PM
just zero the rifle and learn how it hits from different positions/distances.