wsimpso1

Sounds like fun. Where in Alabama? Billski

Pat Sweeney recommends in his book that you install the 3" shell lifter from Remington: It was invented to fix the occaisional event of having the gun lock open with a round laying on the lifter. It also results in not having to hit the shell release to feed a rond from the magazine when you manually cycle the action by hand. If you are installing a DMW EZ Loader, you might as well put in the 3" shell lifter too.

Pat Sweeny is metro Detroit and a moderator on this forum. He wrote a heck of a book available from Borders, Brownells, etc. Definitely worth the money. Billski

I was referring to funneling the mouth of the magazine tube and reciever to make shell stuffing easier and/or faster. I fixed the pinch on my gun by enlarging the opening (plan-view from the bottom) forward about 0.10" and removed 0.5" from the easy loader. Billski

Hey Religious Shooter, If your double feed problem is really turned on and off by use of shells with 0.003 inch diameter difference, your shotgun is on the edge of problems. So, have either one of you looked for damage to the Intercepter Latch or Feed Latch, stickiness or binding in either one, etc? Also, have the guns been modified to make stuffing in shells easier? Is it possible that too much was removed some time, leaving the shell too much latitiude to move around and letting it get past the latches? If so, a new set of latches may be in your future. Billski

I have done Cooper Tunnels twice (I think) in the last year at local matches here in SE Michigan. It was particularly fun watching Chris McNutt go through it with his Pistol Caliber Carbine. I would rather do stages with Cooper Tunnels than do another nightmare like that damned Pipe Dream we had at Michigan USPSA shoot. That was a nightmare, aptly described in the latest Front Sight. Billski

Actually, I would be concerned about the intercepter latch. The intercepter latch is the pivoting latch in opposite side of the gun from the long feed latch, and it is retained with a little e-clip. When the gun is ready to fire, the next shell in the mag tube is pushed against the feed latch (the long latch that is supposed to be staked in) and the intercepter latch is out of the way. When the hammer falls, the intercepter latch is rotated down beyond the rim of the next round by a link lifted by the hammer spring. Then the gas system drives the action bars back, which opens the feed latch, and releases the next round in the mag tube. The thing that makes sure only one shell gets fed onto the shell carrier is the intercepter latch. It is supposed to be between the next round (being fed) and the one after that (that is supposed to stay in the tube). If the intercepter latch is gone or if it is not being actuated by the link with the hammer spring or if the front face of the latch is broken off, well, you would have your jam. Another way to have this problem is if someone has been trying to improve the loading and feeding, and too much metal has been removed from the latch or the tube opening. Hey, do us a favor. When you find out what the actual problem was and fix it, please post the problem and the fix on this thread here to help out the rest of us. Billski

Besides the contribution of optics, I can tell you that in both NRA High Power and in Small Bore (iron sights for both) we teach consistency of cheek weld (among other things) as important to good grouping. My experience watching beginners of all ages makes me believe that the cheek weld pressure variation combined with head position variation (They interact strongly) contributes on the order of one minute, maybe a bit more. There is also butt pressure, support hand position and pressure, torque or grip pressure on the pistolgrip, and whether the mag is touching the ground or not. The more weight you have in the rifle, the less any of these things matter, because they influence how the rifle moves between hammer fall and bullet exit... But light guns rarely handle quickly like we want for run-n-gun events, so you have to compromise there. Now, before you get all paranoid about your conistency (this is NOT High Power, after all), the biggest single actors for most of us are mag touching the ground vs not touching, and if you have floated the barrel. Mag touching issues are relatively easily handled - either zero one way and then establish hold over for the other way, or have GI 20 rounders for prone, or both. Float tubes prevent what the fore end is touching from mattering much. Zero shift due to hand underneath vs side vs barricade on bottom vs barricade on side vs pack support etc, all gets minumized by having a float tube. Clear as mud? Good! Billski

Check out www.williamsgunsight. They have fiber optic sights for a lot of stuff, but since they don't specifically have Bennelli, you could call their tech help number, and get the right products for you. They have several different dovetail sizes, but you might have your gun and and dial caliper in hand when you call them... It is not great, but it is more than what was on here before... Good Luck. Billski

Thanks for the feedback on light carriers. I shall have to think about that. I do understand about throwaway brass, and some day I may get there, particularly if I end up really loving IPSC rifle. Right now, other shooting is still part of my picture, so I still pick up and re-use brass. Billski

Someone else thinks that Final Finish is a good route! I have used it on good barrels and they settle down immediately. A couple firends have tried it and never have they seen an accuracy decrease. Using it to break in a rifle barrel is a little more than a five minute job because you do want to run Sweets and dry patches or JB through it before you start the next finer grit and again before you start your load development or confirmation. I ran the three finest grades in a Krieger (sacrilidge, I know) took fifteen minutes. JB to finish up, and that rifle has been a hammer ever since... Using only the finer grits moved the throat less than 0.002", although the coarser grits moved another rifle (one with a rod damaged throat) 0.004". I wonder how much the throat would have moved in that Krieger with conventional break-in or the first few shooting sessions. It salvaged the damaged throat barrel. Some folks get the willies over putting an abrasive through a rifle, but I became a believer... Billski

Rhino, I do know something about this, and I am a firm believer in breaking in rifle barrels. First, go to the Krieger web site, and read their description of how. The short answer as to why is that the throat is a set of little files after the chamber is reamed, and you need to wear off the high points UNIFORMLY if the throat is to wear uniformly and age gracefully. A LONG barrel life in a 223 Rem is 7000 rounds... Break it in by just shooting it, and accuracy will usually fall off much sooner. The rough throat will tear off some jacket material, covering the rough spots and vaporizing jacket material into the powder gases. Then, as the gases expand behind the acclerating bullet, the copper condenses out of the gases and is deposited on the bore. A proper break-in procedure removes all of that copper after each shot so that the gun gases can remove the high spots in the throat. If you don't do it this way, then your rifle will copper up and shoot good and bad for each of the next 20 or so cleaning cycles. Better to get it out of the way now. So, use Sweets or some other fast working copper solvent for this job, and do not use moly coated bullets for this either. I BELIEVE in a good coated rod and a rod guide that fits your action. Copper solvents will eat bronze brushes and brass jags, and use up their poop doing so instead of cleaning your barrel, so nylon brushes are a good plan for this stuff. Brass jags and patches are great for abrasives like JB. An alternative to this process is David Tubbs' Superior Shooting Systems Final Finish bullets. On a good barrel, you shoot ten each the three finest grades, cleaning after each batch of ten. Less boring quicker, does the same job, and perhaps does it better. After the bore is broken in, clean every 100 rounds or so. If you are shooting plain naked bullets, use Sweets with the nylon brush OR use Kroil and JB on patches. Kroil will not necessarily remove copper, but JB will. One of the best long range shooters (Pete Church) uses JB exclusively... One other point. Primer ash and some strange carbon species is dropped in the back third or so of the bore in rifles, and degrades accuracy. To take it out, use JB or some other mild abrasive every 300-400 rounds. It is probably a good idea to clean with both a copper solvent and JB before you go about the break-in process too. Summing up: Bore guide, coated rod, nylon brushes with Sweet's, brass jag and cotton patches to dry the bore and with JB and/or Kroil. Clean early and often. Break in the rifle wither by the one and clean etc, or Final Finish. The rifle will settle down quickly, allow serious load development, and shoot well for a long time. Oh, prairie rats and 'chucks out to 300 m are in serious danger with it if you learn your ballistics table and how to read yardage. Billski

Hey guys, I do understand that there is a difference between games. Perhaps I do not understand enough of the differences yet... I did change the gun for shooting IPSC. I removed the weights and flash hider, flipped over the sling, installed a larger rear aperture and muzzle brake: IPSC rifle! Being as I did not know if I would love IPSC Rifle, I spent no money and left the internals alone, including the M-K trigger and heavy barrel (gun still weighs 9 1/2 pounds). As I had said, it has been completely reliable up until the weight came apart. I do not think that I negatively impacted reliability, atleast until the "temporary" brazed weight came apart... Yeah, I already know that in a big match, your brass is lost, but for local matches, practice and other shooting, I do reuse my brass, so the weight does have value to me. Even with the weight in the carrier, the gun splits much faster than I can see the sights on the target for the next shot. What do lighter carriers do for you? I can come up with two possibles: Quicker return to battery; Less sight picture disturbance. True? Trouble is that I have not played with them. I shall have to search the forum on the topic. Do you also use a smaller port size with light carriers? I had run the numbers before, and with the weight in one piece, the epoxy should last just about forever. For now and in the spirit of continuing the experiment, I am putting a solid weight back into the rifle and we shall see how long it stays put. Probably way beyond the useful life of the barrel... Yeah, I already know that in a match, your brass is lost, but for practice and other shooting, I do reuse my brass, so recovery and reloading of my brass has value to me. I am thinking about going to Derrick Martin's single stage trigger for the short reset and a more standard weight barrel to make it quicker handling. I figure that I would go for a smaller barrel port size too - I can go back up as far as 0.093" easily enough if I need to... Billski

A little report on an AR15 modification I made back when I was shooting High Power. In 2001 I installed a weight in the rear end of my bolt carrier to slow down the cycling a little to allow longer lived brass. I was getting a lot of stretching and was losing my pampered High Power brass (pocket uniformed, flash hole reamed, weighed and sorted, trimmed, chamfered, etc). This modification pre-dated the Carrier Weight System available from David Tubb's Superior Shooting Systems. I had also housebroken my rifle by tuning the ejector spring and slightly shortening the ejector face. Brass falls close and forward, even with 55's, and has never ever had any ejection issues. This helps with recovering pampered brass. I do not use pampered brass is IPSC Rifle... The weight was made by brazing a stack of stainless washers together, chucking it in my drill press and smoothing the outside. Don't ever do this... My buddy with the lathe was away that week. I attached the weight to the carrier by degreasing the phosphate coating with abrasive cloth and then bonding it in with thickened epoxy. The hole through the middle allowed assembly/disassembly of the bolt and carrier group. It looked pretty solid, so I figured that it would stay put until I found out if it worked... It worked fine for about 1500 rounds with NRA High Power loads (69's and 77's loaded softly, and 80's pushed pretty hard), when it became my number two rifle. It also survived my first season of IPSC, and another 500 rounds, for about 2000 rounds since the carrier weight was added. It has been completely reliable, has a nice soft operating feel, and is easier on brass than it was before. It works just as I had hoped that it would. It became my number two because I built a rifle around a Krieger barrel, including a carrier weight made from a solid slug of stainless steel, also epoxied in. That rifle has about 2000 rounds on it as well, and has been completely reliable since the break-in period. Again. the rifle had a soft feel, was easy on brass and worked very nicely. In fact it is a hammer, but that is what a High Power rifle has to be. Then yesterday in an IPSC three gun shoot, disappointment. The rifle would fire when hand cycled, but when cycled by firing, the hammer would not release, with the trigger not feeling the way it is supposed to... Most strange. We cleaned the chamber, but that did not change things... When I got to looking very carefully at the parts, I found that the braze was inadequate at one place AND the epoxy had failed forward of the bad braze joint. There was a slug of weight that could move forward and interfere with the hammer. Now, it was not loose per se, in fact, it took a mallet and punch to move it, but cycling loads could apparently move it (they did). The rifle had problems that fed upon each other, and either a well brazed weight or a solid weight might have survived forever, but we can not say that now. My next action? Well, it worked fine the other day with no weight, but my brass is back to stretching... I will install a solid slug of stainless and epoxy it in, and continue shooting IPSC Rifle with it. I will report back over time... Of course, you may ask why bother. Well, I do more than just shoot IPSC matches with it, and want my brass back from those sessions for reloading... I also like the fact that it does not shower my companions with hot brass, that it has a nice easy feel that makes it easy to read the sights in recoil... If that is not of interest, shoot your rifle standard... Experiment at your own risk, but by all means, Experiment. Billski

Time to report on results... I will describe things relative to the gun, with the sights being up, trigger group down and muzzle end being forward... I opened up the forward edge of the bottom opening in the reciever, deburred it and funnel shaped the ramp into the magazine, all on the bottom edge of the tube. Other than breaking sharp corners on the top edge, I did not touch the top edge of the mag. I checked for fit frequently as I did this, and realized two things: First, The interceptor latch had a sharp corner and a step where the rim of the shell being loaded could catch. I filed that away for later, and stayed away from that part. Second, As the shell rim slides past the intercepter latch, the reciever just forward of the magazine tube interferes witht he rim. This appeared to be what was driving the shell rim into contact with intercepter latch, and it happens just as the shell clears the carrier, and before it clears the feed latch! Hmmm, so I carefully dehorned the back side of the intercepter latch and relieved the little bump in the reciever until the shells go in without snagging... At no time did I change the front side of either latch, nor did I reshape any surfaces on the top end of the magazine tube entry. Too much fear over messing with feeding. It seems to work nicely, is easily loaded, and yet the latches cleanly stop and feed shells. In practicing with it, I also found that the DMW Ezloader was indeed too long, so trimmed it back a half inch and deburred/dehorned it. Slick! Since I worked on it on Friday night and Saturday afternoon and the 3-G at Livingston was Sunday, I violated my rules about testing prior to going to a match. Going to have to trust that dry loading and dry feeding worked well. At the match it worked cleanly and loaded easily for me in three stages. Another shooter's borrowed gun choked, so he shot mine for two stages and he complimented me on how easily it loaded compared to every other shotgun he had ever fussed with... I begin to wonder if the factorys should pay more attention to this issue. Now we get to see how well it lasts. Two more 3-Gun matches this fall... I will install a bolted in intercepter latch pivot, the 3" carrier, reciever sight, and fiber optic front sight over the winter, and report on those too. In any event, Pat Sweeney's book and Eric W's comments have so far pointed me at the issues and helped me find the solutions. Let's see where the issues go next. Thanks again to Pat Sweeney and Eric W! Billski

Sorry about not answering on the nature of this COF sooner... Several points for description: Viewing from a high spot at DSC is nigh onto impossible... Steel plates near the center were painted different colors, making knowledge of where you in the sequence easier; The pipes were 12" concrete forms about 18" long, lined with roof flashing; Two of the steels bring up paper targets when hit; Just about everyone left the stage shaking their head. It appeared to give big advantage to folks (DSC members?) who could thoroughly scope it. There were people who claimed to have shot the whole thing from two ports, but nobody on my squad did. As things worked out, I must have had 15 minutes spread throughout the morning to look at it one way or another. I found three ports to fire the whole thing, one towards one end, and two right next to each other towards the other end. Most of us had inordinate trouble hitting the steel plates. I did too, and I usually hit steel well, if slowly. I wonder if shooting angled or offset through a tube causes zero shifting (no, I did not hit the port with either the gun or bullets, but I did hear about one race gunner who had the optics looking through the port but the barrel was looking at the wall for several shots... I used 8 extra rounds on the stage, and still left a steel plate standing. I assume that most of them were off call. I do not know what else to say about this stage... It was an obstacle to be fought through in order to fire an otherwise fun match. Elsewhere in the match, the stages were fun, the banquet and prize tables were good to me (anyone need a Caspian slide with sight cuts, external extractor, for .38 Super? Make an offer). Billski

I stand corrected. It is nice to hear that the Hornady bullets can be made to shoot, atleast in some barrels. If I ever want to load cheap for accuracy again, I will know which bullets to try. My local 3 gun matches never run over 100 yards and no plates, about half are hoser stages, and the most demanding thing is 100 yard partial IPSC paper, so I just use my GI 55 FMJ bullets over a mild charge of H4895, and fire makeup shots when I feel the need. Now, I am thinking about the NY IPSC Rifle event down in Binghampton. Ammo for the stage with 300 meter shots will be Sierra 77's over RL15 (my short line ammo left over from NRA High Power), but everything else will be close, so 52's will serve. So, yes, I am in the expensive bullet group except when the course is a hoser. Maybe I am just a bad guy to be answering this thread... Billski

Well, coming from a different community (NRA High Power), there are several theories. The biggest reason that frequent cleaning is necessary in rifles is that they run at higher temperatures (goes hand in hand with higher pressures) that can coat the bore and throat with copper and carbon and primer ash, all preferentially laid down with more at the breech end than at the muzzle. Clean often is the usual mantra - Usual practice now is either every session or every second or third session. High power shooters only fire 50 to 88 rounds in a match and 264 rounds to fire the National Championships, so their round counts are not very high. Cleaning is usually wet patches with coated rods and bore guides, using anything from Sweets to Hoopes #9 to Kroil for copper and powder ash, JB to diamond paste for primer ash and carbon (and sometimes for copper too). Truth be known, the biggest reason to clean often is to keep the gun shooting to the same place each time out. As the fouling builds up, the velocity changes and point of impact will move. I hate finding out that my zero has wandered during a match. Now Derrick Martin, one of the guys who brought us accuracy in AR15's has done the torture test, and concluded that a well built AR can shoot well for over a thousand rounds before cleaning, but I can not help but think that the barrel was getting jacket material and ash ironed into the rear portion of the bore, shortening its life. There are others that say that they do not clean their barrels. Looking at their scores and deciding who to emulate will teach you much. All of the Masters and High Masters that I know are religious about barrel cleaning. The non-cleaners are all in the Marksman/Sharpshoter rank, and do have a tendency to have to fire in alibi relays too. Which leads into another topic. Barrel break-in. The idea is to get the throat and origin of the rifling started on a nice even wear, so that accuracy will run longer and velocity (and thus point of impact) will be consistent. And you have to shoot and clean the rifle about 20 times to really complete the process. So if you clean only once every 200 rounds, the barrel will be 4000 rounds into its 7000 round life before it settles down. In the meanwhile, you are chasing a moving target on zero. Billski

Sorry, but this is an observation, not a contribution... I find it amusing what each game finds acceptable or not. There appear to be different standards for accuracy depending upon your game and your seriousness. Perhaps round count figures in too. IPSC Three Gun shooters are calling 55 FMJ from Hornady acceptable, from other makers OK or not, and praising Dog Town Bullets as excellent. We are also considering ball powders to be OK. And nobody is talking primers... We also tend to burn a bunch of ammo, work from somewhat different positions each time, with our heart pounding, and with a relatively easy target (most of the time - I know, there are 300 yard shots too). NRA High Power shooters consider 55 FMJ's (no matter who made them) to be suitable for weighting the butt-stock on AR15s and little else. Some High Power folks claim that the number 666 is etched on the meplat. The best that anyone can seem to do with these bullets is about 2 minutes. Dog Town bullets are generally considered unacceptable even for reduced course events (100 and 200 yard matches). Remember now, the ten ring is 2 minutes for the prone stages, and only the very very best of them clean that target with any regularity. The standard for accuracy is down around 1/2 to 3/4 minute. If their ammo shot 2 minutes, they would never have a chance at a clean once you include wind, light, and miscellaneous effect. Everyone in High Power considers Sierra to be standard bullets, with Nosler and Hornady being close. High Power shooters generally stay with stick powders because of temperature sensitivity of ball powders. Primer loyalty is a big deal for these folks too, even though some like Win, Rem and CCI Military primers. A serious High Power shooter will burns a lot less ammo per week too... Then you move to the bench rest game, where Sierra and Nosler and Hornady are not good enough for most of those guys. Better get Berger, JLK, or the custom makers, plus they are split between ball and stick powders and the various brands of primers... Varmint hunters - some are picky about their bullets, powder, primers and accuracy, others are not... Different strokes for different folks... Billski

Thanks for the responses. Eric W - Now those photos provide useful info! Thanks for posting them! I thought that I had removed some metal from the reciever around the mag tube on my gun, but I am just a piker compared to you. The cut down length on the DMW feed ramp is something that I shall have to check out too. From your description, I had already concieved of using a flat head allen screw to capture a bushing and cut the reciever for threads to keep the outside flush. I can see that they don't even bother with that, just put a button head allen screw through from the outside, then the bushing on the inside can be beefy. Very nice looking installation too. If Shawn Carlock sold the parts for $20, I'd buy them. Instead, I guess that I shall beg some lathe time and a little bit of stainless from a buddy, and then buy some fine thread screws from J&L. I assume that you LocTite it all in. Thanks again for all of the help. Billski

Pat Sweeney! Thank you for writing that book! It arrived yesterday and I have already read a bunch of it - the sections on the 870, 1100, and practical shooting! Well worth the price I paid! I recommend it heartily. I think that I recognize the locations for some of the range photos too... I have already gone through and dehorned parts, smoothed the entrance to the mag, etc. I have a 3" shell carrier on order, even though I have not had a problem (yet) with the gun locking open while a shell lays waiting on the carrier. I do not seem to have any problems with a mis-timed carrier lift or improper upper and lower stop points on the carrier. Now back to the trapped shell routine, you noted that Remington has fixed (sort-of)the 870 with the flex tab. For the 1100, we can either force it open or fire it to clear the gun, neither of which is prefereable to just not having this type of problem in the first place. I wish they had cured it back at root cause... So, I am still thinking in terms of brazing a little extension on the carrier, and then reshaping it to preclude the trapped shell. This just HAS to have been tried in the past... What are the pitfalls and down sides to what seems to be an obvious fix? Carrier bite maybe? And if it was that easy, I have to wonder why the folks at Ilion did not fix it long ago. I know that the engineers I worked with there would have wanted to, but the bean-counters... Of course, I think that I know why Remington would not change it: It is not a "BIG" problem; It would require both tooling money and increase piece cost; It might not retrofit somewhere in the past; They might have to supply one and its installation to everyone who wanted one all of the way back to the first one built in 1961; Lawsuit exposure for anyone hurt or killed by a bad guy while he had an "old style" 870 or 1100 in his hands, claiming its "defects" resulted in the loss, even if reloading the gun was not even involved. Oh, sorry, my cynicism of corporate decision making and our litiginous society are showing. Anyway, I know that the standard advice is shove your thumb into the mag tube, but I still would like to beat this at root cause, and I am not adverse to a bit of brazing and shaping to do it, but I would like to know what others have found out when they did the same thing. Somebody HAS to have done this before... How about it folks? Second issue - I have the tools to do something about the rather fragile looking attachment of the intercepter latch, but I need to know what the fix is. Anybody willing to part with the info? Somebody selling a part to fit in there? I appreciate the advice any of you have. Billski

You could shoot CDP as a Marksman without guilt because that is your classification. We all know that if a shooter is in the hunt for high CDP and a Master in two other guns, then that shooter really should be up there in CDP. You would be more honest with everyone else and with yourself if you entered higher. I have never seen a shooting game that would not allow you to enter above your current classification. I think that this thing of having seperate classifications for different guns is kind of silly. For instance, in NRA High Power there are two gun types with huge variation in how easy they are to shoot, but a classification earned is yours, and you compete with it even if this is the first time you ever tried to shoot an M-1 or swing the bolt on a Match Rifle. Now, I am not saying that we should have the same scale in each gun - the differing scales for each gun seems to work great, but if you earn a classification in one pistol, I feel that it should put you into that class for all of them. The exception would be forcing a classified pistol shooter to compete at that level with a revolver where the skills do not transfer so directly. So, it really comes down to your own level of integrity. Are you really a Master? Billski Billski

The comments about reloading while moving from one cover to another bring up another whole level. So I have done soe more thinking. Perhaps a visit to the underlying philosophy is in order here. We accept requiring reloads behind cover (when available), and the reason for this is to avoid being in the open without being able to fight back. So, I can see the SO's prohibiting reloading while moving from one place of cover to another place of cover with open ground between them, even if our analysis shows the two pieces of cover to overlap relative to the known bad guys. In a real fight, you do not know where all of the bad guys are, so you want to accept an empty gun only while at the piece of cover that you have cleared. Applying that thought to a curved wall (where you can not see the other end from the first end) or two walls with a corner, you would want to finish the reload before entering the vulnerable space that was out of sight at the start. I can see the SO requiring the reload before a certain place for a curved wall or before rounding a corner when traveling along two walls. Now lets test the single, straight, continuous wall (the question posed to start this thread): You have cleared the piece of cover and know it to be as safe a place as you can have right now, so reloading while traveling along it should be as secure a way of loading as you can do. It appears to be no different than short vertical cover that requires a step to go from one side to the other, and you take that step while changing mags. Therefore the rules make sense, and the SO's should be allowing the reload while behind the wall. Ok, I am convinced... Now for the reticent SO's at certain clubs. Billski

That was the way that I (and others) had interpreted the rules, but here I was officials at two clubs that thought otherwise... Thanks for the reading... Billski

I have attended a couple of matches recently where a low barricade was to be used as cover for shots from both ends. We had to stay behind the cover during the movement from one end to the other, and we had six or eight shots from the first target array. I wanted to do a reload with retention during the crouching run from one end to the other, figuring that it is no different from taking a target array from each side of a narrow barricade with a reload in between and taking the step across during the reload... At one club's stage RO said that he was not intending that and did not like the idea of reloading on the move, but that he had allowed it all day would allow it now. I chatted with a club official while we watched anotehr shooter on that COF, and commented that I liked the opportunity to do that reload while moving behind the low wall. He too expressed discontent about people doing that. When I pointed out that if the stage designers feel a need to prevent that, they can just set up two hard covers and have us cross open ground in between - that forces the reload while standing. At the other club, the RO said that he would PE us if we reloaded on the move because the book says that we are not allowed to reload while moving. I tried (only once) to make the point that I was not leaving cover during the reload, just moving behind the cover. His response was angry - I suspect that he had already been challenged on this, and I let it drop, figuring that I was shooting it the same as everybody else, even if it was neither a tactical nor a rules requirement. So, what is the deal on reloading while moving while continuously behind cover? Billski