michael1778

I run a S&W M&P CORE with a slide mounted optic. Ordering a Trijicon RMR very soon because it sits low enough to allow iron sight co-witness. You're correct that you have more holster options. My Thumbdrive holster has stayed in use long past the point I had expected to replace it. But I don't worry as much about the pistol coming lose. :-) Good luck in your search. Peculiarities of how my eyes work were the primary reason I moved to Open. Hating to load shotguns on the clock sealed the deal.

I just now grabbed the new, unfired M&P CORE that I have (4" barrel) and dropped the locked back slide without any magazine in it (no lectures please, it was only once). I used my right hand (shooting) thumb and it came down easier than I had expected, but it didn't seem too easy. Likely part variability as said above.

Have you ever shot other heavy bullets (68/69 grains and up) with any success?

Any time the M1 Garand is back in action is a great day. I hope it went well.

Steve, you sound like me! I have an Ergo grip but a little more forward trigger could be just right. Thanks for the reply.

Steve, doesn't that make it feel very different from your other gun triggers? I guess that isn't a problem being consistent across all the platforms? I've always worried about triggers acting very different across platforms. But the CMC flat version has often sparked my interest. I hope these questions enhance the original post. I don't mean to thread-jack. Thanks.

I wasn't willing to make such an assumption. But yes, in 223 and their separately listed 5.56mm NATO barrels, JP has a narrower 0.650" section under the handguard. Even the two contour options for the 18" 6.5 Grendel barrels have that same general shape that you described. :-)

Nope-16" light contour. .650 under the handguard. Arent all JP barrels .650 before the gas block and the only difference is the contour after? No. My first check of their web site was to the 22" medium contour 6.5 Grendel. Same shape, but different dimensions. .75 under the hand guard then .875 from the gas block to the end. I didn't look at any of the larger caliber barrels for the LRP-07.

Then there you go. I wasn't sure if the 69s had sucked out of that barrel also or if it was about what was on hand. You've already paid for those so yeah.....use them! Reloading seems interesting but the component shortages, especially powders these days, is a huge turn off. The TAC at reloadingunlimited.com is $65 more for 8 pounds than Natchez, for example. Of course, they actually have some in stock. Natchez is out like so many other places. So, the economics of handloading can get all fouled up too. <sigh> None of this stuff is easy.

Tom, it doesn't like the 68 or 69 grain bullets either? I'm glad you started this thread, BTW.

Please, allow me to assist. I have reformatted the data into a monospaced font table 200 yard zero Range Traj. Come UP (yds) (in) (MOA) ===== ======= ======== 0 -3 0 25 -1.5 5.5 50 -0.2 0.4 75 0.7 -0.9 100 1.3 -1.2 125 1.6 -1.2 150 1.4 -0.9 175 0.9 -0.5 200 0 0 225 -1.3 0.6 250 -3.2 1.2 275 -5.5 1.9 300 -8.4 2.7 325 -11.8 3.5 350 -15.8 4.3 375 -20.5 5.2 400 -25.8 6.2 425 -31.9 7.2 450 -38.7 8.2 475 -46.4 9.3 500 -55 10.5 525 -64.6 11.7 550 -75.2 13 575 -86.8 14.4 600 -99.7 15.9

That was my very first scope ever. Optically, it was excellent. The mount is a possible problem for stability, etc. However, the fine folks here have solved that with various work-arounds.

Thank you very much. I didn't think you were picking on Varget at all. Merely discussing the particulars of its performance in an AR platform, etc.

Hi Mark, To expand that line of thinking to its logical conclusion, what are good examples of "faster" powders that are relevant to 223/5.56 AR use and perhaps other AR15 platform cartridges like the 6.5 Grendel? You gave us an example of a slower powder (Varget). Thank you for sharing your experience. I'm concerned with prematurely wearing out a stainless barrel if I select the wrong powders (if I reload in the near future) or pick factory ammo with slow powders. So many 308 guys I know are card carrying members of what I jokingly call The Church of Varget. That may have been started on the bolt gun side of things.

Thanks for spending my money, Tony. Sounds like it does what I would want it to do. Perhaps I should just get a Stretch 16 barrel to go along with it! <ok just kidding> I may splurge after I get a new hand guard. Current one drives me batty. That's priority one on my Open rifle. [edited to add] Oh dear God, the Miculek comp may be "effective" but it's very nasty for almost everyone. I've found them unpleasant from all angles. I'd hate to be on the trigger for one.

I've run the FastFire 3 in an inexpensive Weaver offset mount for a couple of seasons. I use the offest mini-RDS in every match. Not on every stage, but in every match. My only complaint about the Burris FF3 is that the on/off switch (the only control for, that matter) is on the LEFT side. If you're a righty like me, then you'd have the mini-RDS over to the right. That could be interference from the main scope. That has been an issue for me in primary optic selection, mounting position, mount selection, and scope accessories like a switchview lever, etc. It's all workable in the end, but you have to be careful not to buy something that you can't use and sell it off at a loss. If people are trying to caution the OP about false economies with items that are too inexpensive to maintain a minimum standard of longevity, that is not people telling you that you are "wrong" or "cheap." Quite the opposite, we are focusing on the value for the potential dollars spent by the advice seeker. I'm of the opinion that Open/Unlimited isn't the wallet buster that many make it out to be. In particular, the "Tac Optics" crowd that goes for super tricked out Benelli M2 shotguns and expensive 1-6x or 1-8x optics really need to get out a pencil and paper to see how quickly that all adds up. To my point: Yes, my pistol is more expensive than Factory or Practical, but only by the cost of my slide mounted mini-RDS. It's a S&W M&P CORE. The Trijicon RMR is the only cost above what you would get for Practical ($602 today on OpticsPlanet.com) Shotgun, I run an Akdal MKA-1919XN (bought previously) with lots of Tooth & Nail parts. Let's say that we just buy their race-ready 1919 offering straight away, like I wish that I had done. That's $1699 before shipping. Four mags, a case, and loads of good mods to the gun to be 922r and race-ready. Slap on an optic and go. I'll select the EOtech XPS-2 version that they offer, also. Just a convenience. That's an additional $479. Total for a *smoking* Open shotgun = $2178. Now let's do a Benelli M2 for comparison. One expensive way is get your own M2 then send it to Taran Tactical. GunBroker has a 21" M2 today on sale for $1299 (Auction Item 474404746). Then the full blown Taran Tactical M2 package is another $1349 ( That total is $2648). A less expensive way is take that gun and tack on some things like a Roth XM2BE monotube (10 round) for $199 and then add on a XS sight on the vent rib and some other optimizations by a gunsmith. Based on my own experience with my VersaMax gunsmith job by a well-known smith that would be about $450, more if you lighten the bolt. So lets call it about $500. So, the "More reasonable M2" package is $2000, give or take a buck. Shell caddies would add more, but you really need a way to hold the Akdal mags, so that's a wash. Then we come to the rifle. On my Open gun I have a bipod and an offset mini-RDS that are the only things different from a Practical class rifle. My Harris bipod and integrated QD mount is $220. Burris FastFire 3 is about $269 when you add in the Weaver mount. I'll assume primary scope mounts and switchviews are identical cost across classes. My primary optic is a little on the "long" side: a Vortex Viper PST 2.5-10x44mm SFP for $599 today at Optics Planet. Hmmm, let's try a fancy version of a 1-6x with the Vortex Razor HD II 1-6x. That's $1299, also at Optics Planet. Let's summarize the cost differences. Pistol: Open/Unlimited loses by the price of the mini-RDS = 609 Shotgun: T&N Akdal minus the Reasonable M2 = 2179 - 2000 = 179 Rifle: (220+269+599) - 1299 = -211 Total Increased Open Cost = 609 + 179 - 211 = $577 I can live with that. But, Factory (formerly Limited) is cheaper from the get go. But, if you know that you want to shoot open or that you "have to" shoot open for some reason (like how your eyes work.....my primary reason) it doesn't have to bust the bank. Final thoughts to OP......you need to plan carefully so you don't buy something now and then take a loss on it later. That's the big trap in this hobby as well as my other hobby (photography); buying incrementally in quality until you finally reach the end state that would have been cheaper to get in one step. Tripods are the classic case of that incrementalist (read "cheapskate") approach to photography that busts your wallet more than buying it properly for your needs the first time. Good luck. For your offset RDS question, I think the Burris FastFire 3 should be the lowest price option you consider. I hope it all goes well for you. PS - any vendors or web sites mentioned are listed for reference purposes. I am not affiliated with any of them in any way. Just showing my data supporting my calculations. Thanks. "PPS" - Open is hilariously fun to shoot, in my opinion.

Some compensators apply too much down force on the muzzle. I'm getting less and less tolerant of that as I get older/wiser. I don't need more reasons for the muzzle to jump around!

I corrected my previous post. I totally fat fingered that on my phone. :-) Shapes are still different from brand to brand and product line to product line. Secant, tangent, or hybrid ogive profiles. Differences in "boat tail" shapes at the base. Some bullets extend the jacket farther forward than other hollow points to change the relative locations of centers of pressure and mass. And on and on. OK, so I broke out Bryan Litz's "Applied Ballistics for Long-Range Shooting" to take a look at the two bullets. Their dimensions are different and they happen to correlate with the idea of bearing surface coming into play with the two different maximum loads across the two courses you referenced in your original post. Let's look only at the straight sections of the bullet bodies since those surface areas are clearly the majority portion of the bullet bearing surface on the bore. There are two models of Sierra 155 grain Palma HPBT listed in this text. Sierra #2155 - 155 grains, total length = 1.131", straight cylindrical section length = 0.273", BC(G1)ave = 0.417, BC(G7)ave = 0.214 Sierra #2156 - 155 grains, total length = 1.210", straight cylindrical section length = 0.230", BC(G1)ave = 0.449, BC(G7)ave = 0.229 Hornady Amax - 155 grain, total length = 1.218", straight cylindrical section length = 0.376", BC(G1)ave = 0.415, BC(G7)ave = 0.212 As we can see from the length of the "straight" cylindrical portion of each bullet, the Hornady has much more bearing surface. With that we should expect more friction in the barrel and thus more pressure. For a bullet that generates more pressure we should expect a lower maximum powder charge to be recommended by the sources. Your listed sources from your original post show 2 grains *less* max load for the Amax bullet. This supports the idea of bullet bearing surface being one variable that is involved with this issue of different recommendations. We can't assume these projectiles are point masses. Their shapes matter in many situations; not only in aerodynamics.

Those are different bullets with different bearing surfaces. HPBT is not the same shape as a AMAX. That changes contact in the barrel thus resistance and pressures. Just a thought. [Edited to correct from VMAX to AMAX. My original point remains intact despite the type]

My 26" field VM bolt was never modified. I had other modifications done by C-Runs. I have used Fiocchi Aero slugs, 7/8 ounce, with no malfunctions. They are accurate, also. I'm not sure that is helpful. I hope it is.

I'm asking to be completely clear. After the gas block change, even the bullet weight and load that gave you function problems before ("55g fmj and 24.5 and 25g Tac") now run without malfunction? I'm very glad it is running well, assuming I understood the meaning of your post.

You've got a good plan, in my opinion. Sounds like you're ready to rock that gear set. :-) Enjoy!!

For what little it may be worth, My next rifles or uppers will have Black Hole barrels or the Stretch 16, as appropriate. If I do a new .223 upper or rifle, I'm almost certain to use the Stretch 16 (probably the fluted melonite option, FYI). But I don't have any problems with my current 18" Criterion barrel so that isn't likely in the next few months. What is more likely this year would be if I do a 6.5 Grendel (264 LBC), 6.5 Creedmoor, or 308. I expect to use a Black Hole barrel for any of those designs. I'm rather keen on trying the polygonal rifling for the first time. And I love all the choices BHW offers for calibers, lengths, profiles, and finishes. Amazing.

Absolutely lovely build. I appreciate you sharing. I hope it runs like a scalded dog for you. What did you eventually choose for: Barrel? Handguard? Scope Mount? Thank you very much.

The Warne Scope Mounts Facebook account replied to a question on weight at this URL: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=644884465633707&id=409896755799147&reply_comment_id=645361115586042&total_comments=1 I have included it only for reference purposes. To save everyone from clicking it, they claimed 6.9 ounces. That sounds nice to me. I have one of their RAMP mounts but current scope geometry gets in the way of using the built in offset as my mini-RDS mount. The XSkEL would be a more appropriate product for me, until I switch up scopes.