An even better day - Liberals and Foreigners Avert Your Eyes
-
100 yards 6" Have you ever tried practising? 300 yards and a 4" grouping is the acceptable standard for the British Army.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
Dalek Dave wrote:
100 yards 6" Have you ever tried practising?
I don't think it's all that bad given the weather conditions - 100 degrees, about 80% humidity, and windy - and the fact that's it's a brand new weapon (that is most definitely not a target rifle) that hasn't been broken in yet, and I was using bulk ammo. Besides that, I'm using iron sights with 55-year old eyes, and was shooting offhand (I can barely even see the bullseye at that distance). I think a 6-inch circle at 100 yards is damn respectable.
Dalek Dave wrote:
300 yards and a 4" grouping is the acceptable standard for the British Army.
I bet they don't have a bunch of 55-year olds qualifying for marksmanship either. I don't think I'd even be able to SEE the target at 300 yards without a scope. The freakin 9 ring is a 3-inch circle and I can barely make that out at 100 yards.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001 -
Dalek Dave wrote:
300 yards and a 4" grouping is the acceptable standard for the British Army.
Nah, walking 280 yards and then shooting is not an option for John. :rolleyes:
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles]That's quite a hike. :)
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001 -
I was a machinegunner in the Swedish army. And we had admittedly lower standards. 100 yards and 6" would have been quite acceptable - on full automatic fire.
"When did ignorance become a point of view" - Dilbert
Shya, right.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001 -
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
At 100 yards, I'm putting rounds into about a 6-inch circle
That's not going to be much good against the fast moving asteroid now is it John - I'm glad I'm not relying on you to save planet Earth. If you could do this as 100,000,000 miles that would be a more practical solution.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
That's not going to be much good against the fast moving asteroid now is it John
Well, I figure it'll be coming right at us. If I can see it, I can shoot it. Granted, it probably won't do any good, but I'll go down trying instead of pissing myself and crying out about how unfair life is.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001modified on Monday, August 2, 2010 9:07 AM
-
Is the 6 inch circle moving? Impressive though.
No, but the the wind was blowing.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001 -
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
At 100 yards, I'm putting rounds into about a 6-inch circle
If you are a thief planning to burgle John's house, you now know you need to get to 100 yards from his house after making this daring robbery. If a stray bullet still doesnt hit you, you will be lucky. All the best!
The funniest thing about this particular signature is that by the time you realise it doesn't say anything it's too late to stop reading it. My latest tip/trick - Silverlight *.XCP files. Visit the Hindi forum here.
Abhinav S wrote:
If you are a thief planning to burgle John's house, you now know you need to get to 100 yards from his house after making this daring robbery.
Actually, the chances are pretty good that you won't make it out of the house, but if you do somehow manage to make it off my property, you're free to go and consider yourself lucky enough to have a good chance at winning the next lottery drawing, so buy a ticket. For those that are saying a 6-inch circle at 100 yards ain't that great, consider that if I'm aiming at center mass on a human target, a 6-inch circle is still gonna be a hit. That's "good enough" in my book. The REAL trick is hitting a moving target.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001 -
Shya, right.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001 -
Went to the range with my new rifle. At 100 yards, I'm putting rounds into about a 6-inch circle. I am officially ready for the upcoming revolution (or the approaching 2012 asteroid - whichever comes first).
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001Sweet! :-D
"A Journey of a Thousand Rest Stops Begins with a Single Movement"
-
Abhinav S wrote:
If you are a thief planning to burgle John's house, you now know you need to get to 100 yards from his house after making this daring robbery.
Actually, the chances are pretty good that you won't make it out of the house, but if you do somehow manage to make it off my property, you're free to go and consider yourself lucky enough to have a good chance at winning the next lottery drawing, so buy a ticket. For those that are saying a 6-inch circle at 100 yards ain't that great, consider that if I'm aiming at center mass on a human target, a 6-inch circle is still gonna be a hit. That's "good enough" in my book. The REAL trick is hitting a moving target.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
For those that are saying a 6-inch circle at 100 yards ain't that great, consider that if I'm aiming at center mass on a human target, a 6-inch circle is still gonna be a hit.
So the 'ring-position' will save the man from your fire (note: I'm not going to perform myself the experiment). :-D
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Went to the range with my new rifleshotgun.
FTFY. ;P I did better than that with a .22 Lee Ennfield in my teens - no fancy sights either.
Join the cool kids - Come fold with us[^]
I do better with my .22 as well. Not as heavy, high-quality ammo (I shoot silhouette competitions on a semi-regular basis), and a more than 12-inch longer sight plane, not to mention much better sights (replaced the ones that came on the rifle). At 50 yards offhand with my lever-action .22 (with a 20-inch barrel), I can shoot a 1-inch group offhand with iron sights. At 100 yards, it opens up to 3 inches, mostly because even the slightest breeze can disrupt a standard velocity .22 round. I know this is going to sound like just a bunch of excuses, but consider... 0) On the rifle we're talking about right now (an AR-15), you have to remember it's brand new, and made on an assembly line. If I was looking for a target rifle, I could easily have built one myself, and probably spent twice as much money while doing so. Considering this one cost me $1300, I'm not interested in building one myself because I know how I am about using only the best parts. 1) The weapon is a carbine with a 16-inch M4 profile barrel, and is intended for shorter range work. The cartridge itself (5.56 NATO) is good out to about 550 yards. Given the configuration of the rifle, the rifle simply isn't capable of shooting well at extended distances without being "massaged". 2) We're talking factory sights (the rear one is polymer, and I *think* the front one is twised a little to the left), and I don't really trust its reliability, especially when the receiver heats up and starts affecting the body of the sight. I could gain 6 or 7 inches of sight plane if I moved the front sight to the tip of the barrel, but that would cost a minimum of $150 to implement, and I'm still evaluating whether or not I want to do that. I will definitely be replacing the rear sight. 3) I would probably have to get a different barrel to make it much more accurate. Considering the intended purpose of the rifle, a new barrel of the appropriate configuration (longer and a having a different profile - known as a "bull" barrel) would add at least 1 to 3 pounds of weight to the business end of the rifle, thus defeating it's intended purpose - a lighter weight rifle intended for relatively fast and close-in combat (urban warfare). I certainly don't want to lug a 10-point rifle around with four more inches of barrel. In the end, a rifle of this configuration would essentially become a spray-n-pray weapon at antything much more than 100-150 yards. If you want a sniper rifle, buy one, but don't expect an un-modified AR-15 carbine to be able to fill those kinds
-
Surely you must admin that it would be quite an acceptable accomplishment with a machinegun! :)
"When did ignorance become a point of view" - Dilbert
That would be an accomplishment at 25 yards with a standard-issue combat rifle on full-auto, but a "standard" achieved by a lot of people? I think not.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001 -
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
That's not going to be much good against the fast moving asteroid now is it John
Well, I figure it'll be coming right at us. If I can see it, I can shoot it. Granted, it probably won't do any good, but I'll go down trying instead of pissing myself and crying out about how unfair life is.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001modified on Monday, August 2, 2010 9:07 AM
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
it probably won't do any good
If you were a Geordie though, you'd headbutt it for spilling your pint.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
it probably won't do any good
If you were a Geordie though, you'd headbutt it for spilling your pint.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
:)
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001 -
100 yards 6" Have you ever tried practising? 300 yards and a 4" grouping is the acceptable standard for the British Army.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
Have you ever done this? On 400 meters the AK47 foresight looks quite bigger than the man figure target. On 300 yards the situation won’t be better – you can hit the target with a short burst or with a single shot but grouping in one spot, which you are not even able to see and which is far smaller than your foresight? Sorry but I don’t believe this.
The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word. Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
Dalek Dave wrote:
100 yards 6" Have you ever tried practising?
I don't think it's all that bad given the weather conditions - 100 degrees, about 80% humidity, and windy - and the fact that's it's a brand new weapon (that is most definitely not a target rifle) that hasn't been broken in yet, and I was using bulk ammo. Besides that, I'm using iron sights with 55-year old eyes, and was shooting offhand (I can barely even see the bullseye at that distance). I think a 6-inch circle at 100 yards is damn respectable.
Dalek Dave wrote:
300 yards and a 4" grouping is the acceptable standard for the British Army.
I bet they don't have a bunch of 55-year olds qualifying for marksmanship either. I don't think I'd even be able to SEE the target at 300 yards without a scope. The freakin 9 ring is a 3-inch circle and I can barely make that out at 100 yards.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001Given those 'Conditions' I concur that it was, in fact, a good bit of shooting!
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
-
Have you ever done this? On 400 meters the AK47 foresight looks quite bigger than the man figure target. On 300 yards the situation won’t be better – you can hit the target with a short burst or with a single shot but grouping in one spot, which you are not even able to see and which is far smaller than your foresight? Sorry but I don’t believe this.
The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word. Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
British Army never uses AK47's, for a start you couldn't hit a barn door at 30 paces, and they spray about too wildly. No, the AK47 is for Goat Herders. I used one of these[^], a standard issue 7.62 slr. I also used one of these[^], an SA80 assault rifle, but it was not as accurate. I also fired one of these[^], standard issue SMG. (Incidentally this was also used by Imperial Stormtroopers...see here[^], they stuck a few plastic bits on for effect.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
-
Went to the range with my new rifle. At 100 yards, I'm putting rounds into about a 6-inch circle. I am officially ready for the upcoming revolution (or the approaching 2012 asteroid - whichever comes first).
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001First, congrats for the new toy and second what are the differences between AR-15 and M4, in a first glance they look exactly the same?
The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word. Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
British Army never uses AK47's, for a start you couldn't hit a barn door at 30 paces, and they spray about too wildly. No, the AK47 is for Goat Herders. I used one of these[^], a standard issue 7.62 slr. I also used one of these[^], an SA80 assault rifle, but it was not as accurate. I also fired one of these[^], standard issue SMG. (Incidentally this was also used by Imperial Stormtroopers...see here[^], they stuck a few plastic bits on for effect.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
I have idea what British army uses but this is nothing to do with my question.
The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word. Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
British Army never uses AK47's, for a start you couldn't hit a barn door at 30 paces, and they spray about too wildly. No, the AK47 is for Goat Herders. I used one of these[^], a standard issue 7.62 slr. I also used one of these[^], an SA80 assault rifle, but it was not as accurate. I also fired one of these[^], standard issue SMG. (Incidentally this was also used by Imperial Stormtroopers...see here[^], they stuck a few plastic bits on for effect.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
Alot of that depends whose factory they came out of. The Finns produce AK's that perform similarly to current generation western military assault/battle rifles out of the box. They also cost about as much as an M4gery/etc.
3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18
-
British Army never uses AK47's, for a start you couldn't hit a barn door at 30 paces, and they spray about too wildly. No, the AK47 is for Goat Herders. I used one of these[^], a standard issue 7.62 slr. I also used one of these[^], an SA80 assault rifle, but it was not as accurate. I also fired one of these[^], standard issue SMG. (Incidentally this was also used by Imperial Stormtroopers...see here[^], they stuck a few plastic bits on for effect.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
Dalek Dave wrote:
No, the AK47 is for Goat Herders.
The accuracy of a *well-made* AK will rival its counterparts. The cheap sh*t is like anything else. You get what you pay for.
Dalek Dave wrote:
I used one of these[^], a standard issue 7.62 slr.
Hmm, I bet it's got a 20-inch barrel. Mine's only 16. By that very fact, it won't be as accurate once you get out at/beyond 100 yards.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
