dchang0

POLITICAL CONTENT REMOVED. Please read and follow the forum rules. Thanks, Admin

Whoa, that is WAY too low a round count for that type of accuracy loss for a Noveske. My bet's that you need to clean the crown. Do you use the KG series of cleaning products? They are quite frankly awesome at keeping barrels accurate. When the carbon buildup gets bad on my crown, I'll soak it in KG1 overnight, and then the stuff scrapes off easily with a fingernail. KG2 keeps the bore polished smooth. KG3 is basic gun scrubber like carburetor cleaner, and KG4 is their special gun oil that plays well with their other products.

I'm extremely happy with my MSTN 17" rifle-gas precision barrel. It's made by Noveske and weighs 34oz stripped. The JLT (Just Like Taran) version has fluting that shaves another 1oz off. It's sub-MOA accurate, made of the tougher-than-most Noveske steel, is as light as can be made and still keep that accuracy, has a very light recoil impulse, and is short enough for most barricade-heavy stages. The ONLY thing I'd do is order another one, but Wes says he's sold out. And my only complaint about it is the price, but after having done the calculations, it turns out that Wes is merely passing on most of the base cost of the Noveske barrel.

Oh, additional info: yes, if you press down on the barrel, the Torx screws' heads will touch the inside of the TRX Extreme. Ordinarily with the barrel at rest, there is a small gap of about 1/64" just at the corner of the head. There are two ways to solve this problem: file off the corner of the Torx screws where they are closest to the inside rib of the TRX Extreme, OR you can simply replace the Torx screws with flat-head Philips 6-32 x 1/2" screws (see pic--you can see both approaches). Either approach gives the gas block plenty of clearance where the tips of the screw heads won't touch the inside of the TRX Extreme when you push down on the barrel. The flat-head screws solution allows me to push the muzzle over 1/8" down with plenty of clearance between gas block and inside of rail. Why did I choose flat heads? Well, pan, oval, and button head screws are too wide for the 0.255" wide recesses in the gas block. I could've drilled out a little cone into each hole for the flat head to fit flush, but it isn't necessary with Loctite securing the screws.

Sorry for the necropost, but your thread helped me decide to get the newest JP low-profile adjustable gas block, p/n JPGS-5S, which has plenty of clearance under the Troy TRX Extreme. I posted the photos to another thread here on Enos. To save space, I'll just link to that thread here. Photos of JPGS-5S under TRX Extreme

Good news, guys. The newest JP JPGS-5S .750" low-profile adjustable gas block DOES fit under a Troy TRX Extreme Battlerail (and thereby should also fit under the Alpha Battlerail). These are photos of my 16" midlength upper with a 15" TRX Extreme. Note that there is plenty of room around the JP adjustable gas block, and this setup is very much a free-floating barrel. There is NOT enough room to install the internal metal backing piece for the removable rail sections, however, without grinding/sanding, as there is just over 1/16" of clearance between the bottom of the gas block and the tops of the semi-circular ribs on the inside of the TRX Extreme. One good workaround would be to replace the backing piece with smaller pieces (possibly regular hex nuts or the Troy-made oval backing pieces from the QD mount in the photo or cut the backing piece into smaller pieces) to make room for the gas block. Thus, we finally have a clamp-style adjustable gas block that fits under even one of the thinnest of rails. NOTE: I should add that the gas adjustment set screw happens to be exactly between two of the TRX Extreme's holes, meaning it is completely unreachable without either drilling a small hole or removing the rail system.

Yeah, I don't like hurting people's feelings, but some people are just going to do some really selfish things that have to be curbed, and sometimes curbing that behavior means making them feel bad. For instance, at the recent Bakersfield 5Dogs Winter Classic, me and my two buddies didn't get to fire our first shot of the day until about 1.5 HOURS after the match had started because apparently, people were "playing through." They'd come in one at a time, insert their score sheet near the top of the stack, shoot, then move on without helping to reset. The result was that our scoresheets kept getting pushed down the list. (At first, I was really mad about it, but there was a bigger-picture benefit that I wasn't seeing. By these shooters finishing early and getting out of the way of the entire match, the rest of our stages after the first terrible wait went much quicker. But many of these guys still didn't stick around to help reset, so things got bad for the slower-moving squads who were unable to finish due to dusk. There were fewer and fewer resetters as the day dragged on.) At other times, it was my own squad that was holding up the match by taking too long with obsessive walkthroughs, taking too long with our gear, and too much socializing. We got chewed out by the MD. Some of us got butt-hurt about it, but I'd say we deserved every bit of it. We're facing an interesting situation where this is a sport that's played individually but organized in teams (versus purely individual sports like marathon running or team sports like football). The result is that we have to balance the desires of individuals (more walk-through time, less resetting) against the desires of all the participants as a whole (less walk-through time, more resetting). One really crappy thing about all of this is that if a match runs really slow, then it creates the justification in people's minds to start behaving really selfishly, like "playing through" or refusing to reset. Match directors are faced with a real challenge to keep everybody "civic minded" so that they voluntarily help the match go better for everyone OR watch the match devolve into an every-man-for-himself free-for-all. One way to fight this (and the way most taken) is by creating more and more rules (ending up with rulebooks as large as phonebooks), but another way is to use the natural tendencies of people to drive things. Oakland took the crackdown approach towards Occupy Wall Street, and Los Angeles took the crowd dynamics way, and we see which did better.

Could you elaborate? I'm open to suggestions/improvements on this idea. We ultimately want the shooters to enjoy the match experience, including the overall feel of the match down to the nitty-gritty details. Of course, if you're referring to the hurt feelings that might occur from one half-squad heckling another that's taking too long, in that case, the guys getting their feelings hurt DESERVE it, because they're harming the other half-squad and the other people shooting or running the match.

We've all seen some long stages where two or more squads get backed up. This idea isn't about fixing that. That can be addressed by better stage design, self-resetting targets, or by balancing long stages against short stages within a match. This is about getting squads to reset their own stages faster without having a small army of soldiers or ROs on hand. This is about running a match day fast enough so that no shooters are forced into a "Did Not Finish" situation because the daylight's all gone. Here's a little background first: I've noticed that there seems to be a magic number for the size of a squad. If it's too small, the walkthroughs and shooting go quickly but the resets take too long even though everybody's resetting. If it's too large a squad, the walkthroughs and shooting take forever, and what's worse, the resetting goes slowly too because half the squad ends up goofing off while only a quarter to a half resets. It seems to me that the magic number for a squad is about six to seven shooters. Now, most matches have much larger squads than six or seven. So let's do this: break each squad into half and have one half reset for the other--then switch out the halves. In a large match, squads are broken down like this: 1a + 1b = two teams of six each = 12 shooters total 2a + 2b 3a + 3b 4a + 4b 5a + 5b 6a + 6b 7a + 7b 8a + 8b 9a + 9b 10a + 10b <-- 120 shooters at this point for 10 stages and so on...* The way the half-squads go through the match is like this: 1) Squad 1a starts first on this stage. They get their walkthrough while squad 1b waits. 2) Squad 1b resets and runs squad 1a, who is shooting. No one from 1b may shoot or walkthrough or "air gun" the stage. All they do is reset and prep their gear/ammo. 3) Squad 1b's turn comes up, and they get their own walkthrough while squad 1a waits. 4) Squad 1a resets and runs squad 1b. 5) Next stage, 1b goes first, and flip again on the stage after that, and so on. There are several reasons this approach will work better than single large squads: a) This method applies peer pressure twice: I) The resetting squad heckles the shooting squad for taking too long on their walkthrough**. II) The shooting squad heckles the resetting squad for taking too long to reset. This way, one guy doesn't have to be the a-hole who has to yell "tape and score!" or "reset!" at all the slackers***. b ) Have you noticed that some people rarely if ever participate in resetting? They're always chatting with their friends or futzing with their gear or "playing through" and shirking their resetting duties. And then there seem to be the guys who are always resetting (or ROing or running the scoresheet if at a small match) because they are more civic-minded (less selfish, in other words). This method evens out the workload by preventing anyone from slacking. If they try to goof off, they'll be more obvious to their half-squad-mates and to the shooting half-squad. Shame is a powerful motivator. c) But even without shirkers, the smaller half-squads are more efficient. On some stages, it doesn't take more than three people to reset. Any more than that and they're walking all over each other, etc. On other stages, it takes around six to seven to reset quickly and efficiently (three go up the left side of the bay--near, middle, and far, and three go up the right side of the bay--near, middle, and far). More than seven ends up walking all over each other. The result of either of these situations is that some people end up standing idle because they'd only get in the way. The problem with this is that it conditions the people to keep standing idle, even when they are needed the next time. Dividing squads up into half-squads prevents anyone from falling idle and keeps the momentum up. d) Minimal administrative changes. The scoresheets are the same. People can still squad with their buddies (most large squads are made up of two or three groups of friends). All that changes is the squad sign-up sheets and instructions on how to act in half-squads. e) Easier on the Official Stage ROs--when ALL the shooters start slacking off, it's usually the poor one or two ROs that are stuck resetting the stage. You Match Directors know how hard it is to get people to volunteer to RO--preserve your precious team of volunteers by spreading the workload onto the shooters! So, what do you guys think? This is NOT the only way to improve the speed and flow of a match, but together with other efficiency improvements, it would make for much shorter shooting days. Most important, are there any Match Directors willing to try this out and report back on how well it works or not, along with improvements? My local matches are unlikely to try it, except perhaps Doug at West End Gun Club--he's forward-thinking and might go for it. ---- Notes: * Let's say we have a last squad with a bunch of walk-on stragglers, only five shooters total for squad 13a and 13b. We'd either steal shooters off of five other squads (one from each) to fill out 13a and 13b to 10 shooters total, OR we'd simply divide 13a and 13b up into 2 + 3 shooters and let them go at their pace. Alternately, we could ADD them to other squads, but this may break up a group of friends. Matches with a fixed number of shooter slots and/or long waiting lists (SMM3G comes to mind) won't have to deal with this problem. ** Yes, walkthroughs could be limited by time, but some stages take longer to walk-through to develop good strategies and others go quickly. And a fixed time limit requires enforcement, which not all ROs are willing to do (see below--some ROs are nicer and overlook rules). The half-squad method keeps the peer pressure on the shooting half-squad all the time. It also keeps the waiting half-squad out from underfoot as the shooting half-squad does their walkthrough. This is especially useful for complex "memory stages" where shooters repeatedly walk-through, stumbling and bumping into each other. Each additional shooter increases the delay exponentially, instead of merely linearly. ** When the LAPD broke up Occupy Los Angeles, they used crowd dynamics theory to minimize crowd violence. By breaking up the protestors into very small groups, people couldn't diffuse violent intent across multiple individuals. They were forced to decide to cause trouble as individuals, and people usually don't stick their necks out one by one. In the same way, if one person has to decide to be the squad a-hole and yell at everybody, he's not likely to do it by himself--and this includes the OFFICIAL Stage ROs, who are nice guys and gals just like the rest of us. But if the heckling/peer pressure is spread out across a group of people, they are more likely to do it. We all know this in school: it's a lot easier to be mean in a pack than one by one.

It seems there was a recent price increase across the board, as nearly all dealers are reporting $949 or $999 now. I think it was triggered by SHOT 2012--see below. Too bad--they lost my business when they did that. I'll wait until the Leupold Mark 6 1-6X now, even though it's expected to be $1600-$1800. I'd recommend against Optics Planet. They did a bitch move on me recently. Last year, I ordered an S&B Short Dot Gen 2. It had to be backordered. After SHOT Show 2012 passed, S&B apparently pulled a price increase on them. Optics Planet canceled my order, claiming it was a "typographical error." BULLS--T. It was because they didn't have the scope in stock, waited too long on backorder, got caught by a price increase, and needed a way to weasel out of the deal. Needless to say, I won't be buying from Optics Planet again. Because I was waiting for my order and not checking various forums, I missed out on three used Short Dots that sold during my four-month wait.

They're not bright enough for use in desert or snow environments. The reticle ends up being a dull reddish black even at the highest setting.

Strange that others report the Oakleys don't last. My pair of Oakley Cartridge hiking boots has been absolutely awesome. I've worn them to many, many matches and even most days of the week as an all-day shoe. I've even run them through the washer and dryer several times, and they're holding up great. In fact, they look 95% new, with only a little wear on the heel (all my shoes wear on the heels first). I have worn through the thin nylon mesh lining on the inside of one heel--another wear point in all my shoes. It's too bad the Cartridge are discontinued, although you can occasionally find NOS ones on ebay. They are made of waterproof, breathable e-Vent material and work great in rain and mud. My only complaint is that they are a summer boot without any thermal lining, so your feet will get cold in the snow, unless you have two layers of thermal socks. I'd happily buy the new Oakley LSA (Land Sea Air) Terrain boots when I finally wear the heel's tread pattern down too much.

Thanks very much for the detailed info--if I do buy that case, I'd probably have a padlock point installed (made of steel and pop-riveted to the case). There are reports of the TSA stealing firearms out on the web; though in most of these thefts they simply took the entire case, I'd want to make it harder for them to get to the guns than just using a TSA master key which is on many of their keyrings. HOWEVER, a non-TSA padlock could draw too much attention to my one case out of thousands, so that plan could backfire too.

Technically, yes and no. The TSA reserves the right to inspect your case with guns inside if it triggers an alert (presumably via x-ray scanners), including the right to cut the locks off your case. This is the "defensive" position they take. The real experience depends on the practices of the airport screeners. Typically, the agent in front of whom you place the declaration card inside the case will look at the firearm(s) and ammo and confirm that they meet TSA regulations, which are here: http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/editorial_1666.shtm The policies vary from TSA checkpoint to TSA checkpoint, from airline to airline, and from airport to airport. You can Google "firearms declaration TSA" and read up on plenty of different experiences, many involving showing the firearms to the TSA agent before inserting the declaration card into the case and locking it back up in the agent's presence. This "inspection" is usually just a bored and cursory glance over the stuff in the case, not a hands-on inspection, which *could* be requested by the TSA but would be performed by an LEO. Other reports say that the TSA only x-rayed their closed case, without asking for it to be opened. So YMMV, as the saying goes. But one clue in the regulations that indicates the TSA does inspect is this one reg: "Travelers should remain in the area designated by the aircraft operator or TSA representative to take the key back after the container is cleared for transportation." "Take the key back?" That implies that they do visually inspect the contents of the open and unlocked case in your presence.

The TSA has their chance to search/inspect the firearms at the check-in point where you fill out the paperwork and then lock it back up. After that, they are not supposed to open the case, although I suppose they *could* claim some emergency authority if they really wanted to cut open the locks. You definitely don't want them to have it easy, otherwise an unscrupulous TSA agent (like the one who recently stole $5000 in cash from a traveler) could open the case, steal your firearms, and then seal it back up.

I've knocked my PST's windage turret out of zero twice, both at major matches. NOT COOL. The other big minus about the Viper PST and the Razor HD 1-4X scopes is that they are nowhere near bright enough for the Southern California sun. My reticle appears black even when turned to the highest brightness. My current recommendation for a cost-conscious 1-4X with truly daylight bright reticle and BDC is the Meopta ZD 1-4X--it's about $750-$800. The Trijicon Accupoint would be recommended too except that holdovers at longer ranges are difficult without lots of practice due to the lack of BDC or stadia lines.

Wow, a suitcase-style case--sweet! And that fits a 20" upper, no less--that is awesome! How sturdy is the locking mechanism? It spooks me a little that there's only one locking latch (that I can see in the photos--maybe there are more?). I've had a couple of Samsonite latches fail on me over the past twenty years, so it'd be nice if there were more locking latches as backup...

Thanks--that Starlight SC - 061338 might work, although it's heavier than I'd like (2lbs more than the SKB but with ~0.5 cu. ft. less volume).

I used to own a Pelican 1720--nice case, but there's just not a lot of interior volume for the high weight. I'm looking for a case that meets the following: + as light as possible (while empty) and still durable enough for flying (no need for the insanely heavy waterproof cases). I plan on packing padded soft cases inside of the outer hard shell, with each gun in a separate case, so the outer shell doesn't have to be super thick or bombproof + doesn't trigger any oversize baggage fees in terms of outside dimensions + can hold a disassembled 17" barreled AR w/ collapsible stock (28" long while disassembled in soft Castle Rock Tactical case), Benelli M2 w/ 21" barrel (46" long in soft case when assembled, 31" in soft Castle Rock Tactical case when disassembled), and Glock 34, plus mags and maybe belt-accessories and/or a small amount of ammo. + no foam included + non-TSA locks or at least a couple padlock locking points if TSA locks are present I've read here that some guys are using golf bag cases--those sound like they'll work fairly well. Something like an SKB 2SKB-4812WS 48" x 12" x 12" interior (but this model has TSA-openable locks). Also, if I break down the shotgun, I could probably go even shorter than 48"--as short as a 36" x 12" x 12" interior, which still leaves plenty of room for even shell carriers, holster, mag pouches, etc. 36" x 12" x 12" is probably more of an "equipment case" than a rifle case; it opens up the possible kinds of hard cases that would fit the bill (camera equipment cases, music equipment cases, etc.) Here's one example of what I'm thinking of, but again, it's ruled out because it's got TSA-openable latches: 36" x 12" x 8": http://www.skbcases.com/industrial/products/prod-detail.php?d=c8&id=168&s=p# So, what other cases have you guys tried, and what are the gotchas you've come across? The goal is still lightweight and compact.

I've used ammoman, sgammo, and ammunitiontogo all to great effect for buck and slugs, but nobody's been able to beat the local Wally World for 7.5 and 6 birdshot.

Yes you can--this is pretty much how I got started into 3-gun. I say "into" because I came out of the Appleseed Project and went into 3-gunning on 400yd targets and did quite well. There are two big differences, of course: 1) height over bore at 25yds comes into play for ARs 2) wind and bullet-drop hold-overs But the fundamentals were there, so the AQT is valuable enough, even though it isn't a perfect replacement for actually shooting on the real targets at the real distances.

Glad to help, Mike-- Here's one little TRX Extreme add-on that most in my squad are eagerly awaiting: http://noveskerifleworks.com/cgi-bin/imcart/display.cgi?item_id=k9-trx-da&cat=178&page=1&search=&since=&status=&title= Oh, and the Prismatic DCD is great and can be found for surprisingly low prices on ebay, both used and NOS. Do note, however, that the Prismatic is not super daylight bright, which may be a challenge in Texas daylight.

You will love the Troy TRX Extreme 15" handguard (not the VTAC series). It's ugly to some, but it's got full access to the ecosystem of TRX Extreme add-ons like the QD lugs and K9 barricade-grabber from Noveske, among other offerings from other companies. It's also tough as nails and very, very lightweight. I love mine so much I bought an extra one that's just sitting around waiting to someday be used in a build.

Don't get too hung up on the long range gear and focus more on the Indian behind the bow and arrow. You could drop tons of money into an awesome sub-MOA rifle and still be off by >10MOA because of building a crappy position or having a high heart rate jittering your aim all over. Gear matters for sure, but focusing on your skills will get you far more bang for the buck, so to speak. I started with a 3-4MOA 16" carbine M4gery just like you and shot quite well with it at first because I had so many months of practice behind it. We were shooting up to 400yds at the time (up to 470yds now), and this only proved to be a problem when there were high winds, which I solved by going with heavier bullets. No extra gear needed. I really only started upgrading my gear to keep up with my squad, whose times just kept getting better and better. But I recently saw a guy running a tactical-ish 16" carbine kick most of our butts, so it's back to the Indian, not the arrow.

IIRC, in the development of the 300 AAC Blackout, they tried smaller projectiles, but I forget what those cartridges were called. Should be fairly easy to find that info online.