Jmyers89

So I put together the build for blckout. This was not my first AR build by any stretch and not my first PCC. I noted when assembling it that the barrel extension felt kind of undersized. I haven't mic'ed the barrel or the receiver to know for sure, but when I was building it I noted that. I also torqued the barrel nut to about 40ft/lbs which is pretty normal for a non-indexing barrel nut. I won't 100% rule out that I made some mistake, but I feel pretty confident in saying that I probably didn't f'up that part of it. I have read the correspondence sent by shooters connection, as well as what has gone between MBX. And for 3 different shooters, to buy the SAME barrel from the SAME vendor at roughly the SAME period of time and to have the SAME issue, I find it a little unlikely that those 3 shooters made the SAME massive mistake in assembly. It looks walks and quacks like it's an issue with the barrel. Here is my issue with what MBX has offered to do, and it's really a simple fix had they been up front with it to begin with. They took the barrels back for 2 shooters and tested them, great. But when they got results that differed from what the shooters got, they have thus far that I have seen NOT offered what their setup is, just essentially accused their customers of being dumbasses. If they contend that this was some assembly issue by the purchasers, then please share with us what exactly your setup is, what your torque values are and other pertinent details so we can eliminate some variables. There is a big difference between creating a scenario where your barrel shoots under controlled conditions, and what it does in the real world on somebody's gun. For shiggles though, let's say all 3 folks just assembled them wrong or can't shoot. If your barrel is that great, what is the harm in saying "we're sorry you're having an issue, why don't we just swap this out for you and we'll see what's wrong with it". Or better yet, ask some questions of your customer about their setup and try and troubleshoot the issue. The first reaction was "nothing wrong with the barrel, they test fine". You could have tested the barrel, decided it was fine and sold it again and nobody would have known different, and you wouldn't have egg on your face from essentially telling your customers they are idiots and they are wrong. What sets companies apart is not how they handle the easy transactions, it's how they handle the adversity. Anybody can look good as long as they ship on time and generally provide what you pay for. It's when things don't go right that you really see a company's true colors.

You sound a little cranky for a guy with a total of 3 posts. There will be plenty of different replies to posts here on BE, take them with a grain of salt and relax a little. Squeezing the mouse too hard will give you cramps. Doug My post wasn't cranky at all. You didn't answer the question. You have since answered the question, and I appreciate your input. I can now see that the concensus is probably that a squeeze bag would be construed by most to fall under 7.2.2.5 and would be illegal. I have wondered for a long time why squeeze bags are unheard of in 3 gun, when they are so prevalent in other gun games. If a precision rifle guy has a use for one, why couldn't a 3 gun shooter glean any benefit from them in certain scenarios. What I didn't know was if they were unheard of because they were mainly illlegal, if people saw no benefit to them, or had just never considered using them. Equipment and techniques evolve because people choose to question the way things are. If nobody ever did that, we'd all still be shooting Colt HBAR's and 870's from leather holsters. IMO the way the rule is written is (purposefully) vague, which seems to spit in the face of the big boy rules atmosphere 3 gun has made a name of. The spirit of the rule to me, was to purposefully delineate equipment for divisional purposes. If that's the case, rather than adding a clause to the rule which completely muddies the waters, why not just say "No artificial support devices such as bipods or monopods or any device that deploys more than one leg to support the rifle" and adding the exempt conditions of monopodding off the mag or VFG as already written. Then you are regulating equipment based on finite design principles rather than trying to write an all encompassing rule trying to regulate function. Written that way you would eliminate questions of whether or not the Novseke K9 is legit, or the magpul AFG, or the Atlas rail attachment gizmo so on and so forth. I don't know about you, but given the option if I were offered a squeeze bag or a bipod, I would take the bipod in a heartbeat.

The question that was asked was not "do i need one"...the question that was asked was "is it legal". More practice never hurts, but I didnt ask if I could use a squeeze bag because I can't hit targets inside 300 yards. I asked because it's another tool in the tool bag, and if it's legal I want that advantage where it merits it. Thank you for your thoughtful reply Mark, that's unfortunately the answer I suspected since the rule is so poorly written IMO.

Ive searched high and low for an answer to this question, but have been unable to find a definitive answer. 3GN Rule 7.2.2.5 says "Any rifle supporting devices to include but not limited to bipods and or monopods or a device that deploy legs and or supports and elevates the muzzle end of the gun are not permitted. Coupled or single magazines are not considered supporting devices. Forward grips that are less than five (5”) inches long are allowed." IMGA rules mirror the same. I shoot TO/Practical, and have a few squeeze bags laying around for precision rifles. I have shot many a stage where tossing a small bag under my handguard would help significantly against a barricade or other object. The PRS guys live and die by squeeze bags of all shapes and sizes. My inner range lawyer construes this rule to mean supporting devices attached to the rifle. So, would most MD's consider having a small squeeze bag in hand to support the rifle a violation of this rule?

This 50 page thread is what caused me to buy one of these Stoegers. I'm a pretty mechanically adept guy, and for things I'm familiar with, I have no issues doing the work on my own. Being new to 3 gun and generally new to shotguns, I decided to let someone who really knew what was going on to handle putting the gun together. I think what impressed me most was a business owner investing the time and equipment capital to develop competition solutions for a "cheap" shotgun, and on top of that they are elegant solutions. It obviously helps that Tom and his staff are extremely helpful and knowledgable about their product. I called and left a voicemail in early July and got a prompt return phone call, where I submitted my order for a complete shotgun. I had the complete package, with the addition of a Hi-viz sight, shortened buttstock and kick eez pad added, and had the trigger guard relieved. I also requested his left handed safety. I got the gun in Saturday and was very impressed with the workmanship and upgrades. I had a mostly stock m3000 belonging to a buddy to compare against. The trigger is substantially better than stock. Looking forward to shooting it this weekend. Thanks again Tom! I had taken some pictures of the gun to post, but not allowed due to my post count.