michael1778

I've seen many of his rifles in matches. I also had the pleasure of being in the same 3-gun squad with Mr. Barnes back in October 2013. Finally, I handled one of his rifles in a shop a few days ago. It's good stuff. Oh and a couple of smaller parts on my competition rifle are made by his shop. No complaints. They sponsor shooters and support our sport in other ways. If you like what they offer, get one.

You got the exact one I expect that I would want if I were in the market. Looking forward to your findings. I'm guessing a Gas Hog or a DR would be good for up front?

Oh you aren't getting away from shooting matches with me, Steve. I just need to bring the right gear. Ironman is a multi-year "Stretch" goal for me. Should help me focus everything I do to a concrete long-term goal. Before that? A bunch of matches and training here in NC and neighboring states.

I've used the AR Gold across two rifles. For careful or long range shots, I get set up, take up that tiny bit pre-travel, and then "think" of the shot happening.....BANG. So, I happen to like them.

Looks nice to me.

So far, I see some discussion on the cost vs benefit for having a dedicated long rifle for the match. Then, if one is chosen, it seems that the gas gun is the unanimous recommendation (caliber TBD). These have been very helpful responses, so far. I hope a few more come along. Thank you all very much!

Yes. If 55 grain works for many of us then 50 should be fine. Clearly it works for your barrel, so don't fight it. Congratulations on your successful experiment.

Hello Everyone, Apologies in advance if this is a super rookie question, but here goes. In 2 or 3 years, I would like to improve my 3-gun skills to the point that I could try to register for the MGM Ironman match. That's my stretch goal for 3-gun as well as individual physical fitness. I work well with goals like that. OK, so I shoot Open (or Unlimited in some rule books) and that won't change. My question is only about what would be the better style of 4th gun for long-range bonus targets. Except for training events prior to Ironman, I won't use this rifle for any other reason. It would be all about best performance at that match, perhaps in years to follow if I can handle it. I've been searching high and low online, including here at Enos, but I haven't found a crystal clear recommendation. The best I can see is some preference for semi-autos since the bonus targets are shot on the clock. However, that isn't an overwhelming recommendation all around, so I needed to ask. The two part question is: Bolt or Gas gun for MGM use only? I expect only to use this rifle for training for Ironman and then match use there. If Gas gun, what platform would you recommend? AR15 in a "factory" caliber. AR15 in a funky wildcat? Go to a new 308 AR size frame? Background to help your responses: I happen to have at least one AR15 receiver set available for conversion to a dedicated long range gun. I don't reload currently, but I could start for whatever caliber I select in an AR15 platform. Wildcats could be possible. If a Bolt gun or large frame (308-size) AR are recommended, I would prefer to stick with "factory" ammo, which in my definition includes boutique makers like Copper Creek Caliber or rifle maker recommendations in your recommended platform are also welcome. I'm asking early like this because I need to decide what gear I own to sell to raise some needed money for basic living expenses....right now. But, I would like to avoid taking a loss on items today and then turn around late this year and have to buy similar items again. I'm very concerned about messing this up. Alright, I think that covers it. Thank you very much for your guidance. I appreciate all the great insights I get here. I hope this was the best BE forum for this question. -- Mike

That is the key question, I agree. I haven't seen any complaint about a breakage. I'm not that connected with the larger community either, but one would think we would see lots of complaints if it were a significant issue in the real world. I did want to lay out the relevant composite material issues for all to see. That was my main goal. And yes, I am in strong agreement that the movement many of us notice is most likely from the mounting system in the first generation product. That is the case for my handguard, at the very least. As such, I'll replace it with something else this year. At the moment, I have to decide what this rifle will be used for in the future. It may get rebarreled for a different purpose than typical 3-gun work which may mean a new role for the handguard.

OK, I will try to contribute to the material science and mechanics of materials portion of this thread. I'm doing composite material research in graduate school anyway, so I might as well use that for the common good. :-) Both of my BE.com friends quoted above are correct about discontinuous fibers and "holes" in things. However, for fiber reinforced plastics it's worse than you think when you apply concepts from metal behavior. I have an AP Customs carbon fiber handguard on my current competition rifle. I think it has two concerns. One, the mounting on the mil-spec barrel nut isn't as stiff as some of us would like (not a material issue). Two, the "holes" in the carbon fiber have a significant impact (large decrease) on the stiffness of the material (the discontinuous fiber idea) as well as induce large stress concentrations; much more than in metallic materials ("holes" idea). When you compare to a CF tube with continuous fibers, like the Carbon Arms model I have on another rifle, it's a noticeable difference in material properties. When you put that many slots into a handguard, you're getting mostly the matrix (a.k.a., plastic) as the driver of stiffness. The fibers have to transfer load into the matrix all over the place and can't use their native properties very well. Then you get the stress concentrations from the openings ("holes"). So many people hear about the stress concentration factor of a circular hole in a plate being "3x" when they take a basic materials class. Many come away with the idea that it was driven only by geometry. Unfortunately, that is not the case. It a function of geometry as well as the small scale material properties. Carbon fiber (CF) reinforced plastics can have nearly 9x stress concentration factor for the same geometry that gives you 3x in an isotropic metal. Sometimes the superior properties of the CF composite can naturally overcome that. But if you put a bunch of slots in a handguard, I'm not so sure. My engineering brain has grown much more doubtful over time. I'm running a bipod now and may have need for one or two other options on the handguard, so I expect that a more traditional metallic design with many attachment options will be in my future. Comparing to other CF handguard designs on the market: PRI doesn't do as many "holes" and makes them circles, not long slots. I think that is on purpose. That gives a smaller fraction of cut fibers while using a more benign shape for the "holes". Similarly, the weight of the Lancer models tells me that they have thickened the tube laminate enough to overcome the slots they have put in. But, that often means that the weight savings over isotropic metal designs is reduced. As an example of a very recent design, BCM claims to use a aluminum-magnesium alloy for part of their weight reduction. Then the 1.3" inner diameter geometry helps reduce the total amount of material needed (my observation, not their claim). That should be smaller than the I.D. of my AP Customs handguard. That seems like one part modern metallurgy and one part geometry "cheating" (in a good sense.) So, I've rambled. My intent was to highlight what are the issues involved with carbon fiber in handguards. In my personal opinion, it's no accident that CarbonArms focused their handguards on continuous fibers. The stiffness and strength (these are not the same properties) are both preserved that way. I love composite materials, so much so that I've dedicated my PhD research to their use in high performance spacecraft applications, not to mention my past engineering work designing nuclear submarine structures with FRP. But, even with my love affair for fiber reinforced plastics (FRP), one needs to be careful in their application and use. To that end, any handguard that I need which will have lots of 'stuff' on it, I'll very likely go with something metallic. For clean-lined competition uppers with no "go-faster" parts for Open/Unlimited, I would strongly consider a continuous fiber CF handguard or a CF model that showed clear evidence of over-design to counteract problems (e.g., added material, etc) caused by discontinuous fiber reinforcement and stress concentrations. If you made it this far, I sincerely thank you for reading.

Indeed. I agree. Many of these are a wash with regards to mechanical performance. I went with the DR more for size and weight at the muzzle. Purely my own preference for the rifle I was designing at the time. I wanted to keep the effective barrel length as short as possible for an 18" Criterion. I could turn around and use another comp I have in my parts bin on another design. I happen to dislike two widely used comps because of their effects on others around me while competing. Again, my personal preference not to hammer people with side blast, etc. OP, you have the Seekins. I vote you stick with that and save your money for other goodies. Maybe some samples of new ammo to test in the new upper? Lots of options.

Ive used the DR, Nordic Corvette, and Rolling Thunder comps. Unfortunately they have all been on different rifles. Corvette was impressive taming a carbine gas 16" barrel gun. The DR is on my current 18" rifle. It seems to work fine and is a good size; not intrusive or heavy. The Rolling Thunder is on a rifle that I haven't shot in maybe 2 years., so I couldn't say anything about it for comparison. The DR is the most volume and weight efficient of the three.

Strong Side Tactical. Yep. There are 5 versions: http://www.strongsidetactical.com/ar15-ar10-barrels-barrel-assemblies/ and they come with a gas block and tube. These precision barrels are excellent. I have run quite a few rounds through it with a variety of BGs and comps, as has James, and we are both impressed. Wide operating window will allow you to tune it how you want, but a JP aluminum BCG and a light and effective comp...you might put away the 18" guns, That last part made me sit up straight in my home office chair. You've got my attention, Mark! Thanks to everyone helping to make this an informative thread.

Bryan, When I saw Charles posting the results with your Pump division win this weekend, it felt like the Universe was getting back in balance. I hope you can get back to shooting Heavy Metal as much as you would like. Congratulations on the win!! I'm afraid I don't have any experience with Freedom Munitions products to pass on.

Thanks for satisfying my curiosity. I need to get out to the range with you and see your two 6.5 Creedmoor rifles. I'm not surprised you matched caliber to your other long-range capable rifle. I like your plan for tomorrow. I hope it works out like you want it. I need to get out and shot more in 2015, no doubt. I'll be in touch. :-) All that under 15 lbs. Nice!!

Steve, is that *your* Precision Rifle rig? Sounds like an amazing design. :-)

Following up on shakman's comment, I usually run Prvi Partisan 75 grain. It's the slightly heavier version of what he is using. Cost is usually the same between the two bullet weights.

That outcome reminds me of how so many handgun owners went "up caliber" during magazine capacity restrictions years ago. My intuition is that collectively we all got slightly more lethal in our handguns. Anyway, I dare say that all legislation has some degree of unintended consequences. I'll have to do research if I'm forced to move to MD. I might have to move "up caliber" on my rifles.

My past experience with the Corvette was very positive. I have it in my parts bin waiting to go back on competition duty, if ever needed.

I'll join you in that wait. :-) Thanks for the news. I know we have done some courting of that entire conglomerate to put a new location in NC. I don't remember which lines of business they plan to put here.I remember Remington, but don't know if others were part of the plan.

It's a big relief that you got that sorted out! I'm very happy for you. Looking forward to a positive range report this weekend! Good luck, brother.

Thanks Nick. Great information. Steve, that isn't good to hear. I hope you can get that sorted out this week!!

Nordic. I've yet to see any 18" customer complain. And, like the previous poster, my 16" Nordic is beyond excellent, so the 18" must be great. I made my 18" barreled up with a Criterion just to do something new and get first hand experience with their barrels. They use different technology from each other. So that was an excuse to try something else. I don't need my 16" Nordic upper any more. It just sits all alone in the corner. But, I haven't had the heart to sell it because it's easily sub-MOA accurate. Proven in testing by Carbon Arms, no less. I should sell it but it's just so damn good.......... I hope you will have a similar experience if you select an 18" Nordic barrel.

Nice. Those should go together well. What are you thinking about for barrel maker, profile, and gas system length?

Bushnell, Vortex, and Burris are optical brands that come to mind.