Glockinator

Not a bad idea to get a bulge buster. I picked up one to run range brass through.

Around here you have to figure in parking and cost to get in so that frequently makes the big box stores cheaper.

To get back to a more mechanical discussion of flyers imagine a bullet with a void on one side or something else that could cause a variance of weight to disturb the balance. As the rotational forces act on it after it leaves the barrel it could cause the flight to spiral without wobbling. You may not see stability issues show up as keyholes in some cases. Same could be said for bullets with uneven or flawed bases. As that bullet exits the end of the barrel the gasses acting on it could jet off to one side or some other oddity and cause the trajectory to deviate slightly. If you look at differences in bullet weight such as 1 to 2 grains from bullet to bullet it is postulated that the bullet stays in the bore for a different length of time and exits at a different point in the upward recoil of the gun. I'd expect this to show up more as vertical stringing. Any difference in uniformity of any kind from bullet to bullet could potentially cause a difference in trajectory. The question is how much of a difference does it make. In some rifle loads I have gone wacko weighing and segregating cases and bullets and hand trickling powder and uniforming cases. How much difference it made was hard to tell as that rifle was a half moa shooter and at that point it was hard to tell if the difference was ammo related or shooter related.

I'm running a 7.5 in 300 Blackout with a Kak flash can and it's a nice little combination. IN blackout though it seems the pistol length gas systems work better even on the longer barrels. Eventually mine will be a SBR and suppressed when the stamps come in.

A lot depends on what you want to cast for. Lead pipe joints would be good. The pipe itself is soft but the solder in the joints has more tin and antimony to make it harder. Definitely peruse Cast Boolits site as there is a wealth of casting info over there. I wish I could stumble on a stash like that.

But would the authority for that not come from the local fire codes and not from SAMMI. I figured SAMMI was at best a recommendation in that regard.

Interesting but does SAMMI have any authority to regulate storage in the homes of different states?

We've never been disappointed with Kenmore.

Yes there is, install Linux!

You can also pick up a Hornaday scale around that price as well. I was looking at one to augment my ancient beam scale. Don't know how good they are...

Looks like I sorted it out for those that are interested. I changed out to another hand guard with a little more room thinking the gas block was very close to the top of the Nordic guard and may have been touching. Seems to have made the difference. That is 20 rounds of the same cheap factory 55 grain ammo I tried before. Now to see if I can find a load it really likes.

The 75 grain A-Max bullets are to long to be loaded in ARs unless you want use longer than mag length and single load.

http://www.jcweaponry.com/images/ar15/BB.JPG

I've talked to several sources locally and been researching sources for the last few months, one is a type 7 FFL who "manufactures" AR's to spec. Essentially he purchases parts, has some manufactured for him then assembles. But he keeps a sheaf of documentation to keep abreast of the recent rulings since he is could loose his license (aka livelihood) for not doing it properly. From my understanding it's post form 4473 when the buffer tube is attached when ATF designates receivers sold as "other" as pistol or rifle. Mostly since all stripped receivers should originate as other unless you specifically request a certain type. To be sure I am most definitely erring and advising on the side of caution to avoid "shortening" a rifle into a SBR and starting with a receiver that has never had a buffer tube attached. It's just not worth taking the risk as "I thought it was legal" is not a defense to federal prosecution. Granted how could they prove it unless you gave documentation in the form of pictures in media and such. With the ATF Bureaucracy it's better to not tiptoe in the grey areas as they have no sense of humor. There has been a lot of confusing and differing opinions coming from ATF in this area. I am afraid a single source even when it is ATF itself is not the end of things.

You might want to recheck that. I've just been doing a little checking and doing a pistol build myself with thoughts of doing a SBR later. My understanding is if the first buffer tube on the lower is a Rifle it continues to be classified from that point on as a rifle lower. A Rifle can not be legally converted to a pistol without falling afoul of the NFA SBR rules but the other direction is legal and can be reverted. Check for the changes in the last year as with all the Sig brace and shouldering letters things have gone back and forth a bit. You don't want to get into any areas of constructive intent. Either way having unambiguous pistol receiver would be preferred to avoid any possible issues.Especially when stripped lowers are available for under 50 bucks right now.

Actually you have to start with a receiver that has never had a rifle stock on it to be legal.

I've been known to shoot a half moa off a bench and bags with other rifles.

Could the barrel nut be causing this in some way?

Only upper and assembled lower I have access to right now. No other bolts to try, but I discussed that with Rainier and they do not seem to think it's a problem. I'm thinking I am going to send this barrel back for them to look over. If the one they send back does not behave maybe I'll buy another bolt. I'm going to need a second one anyway for another build.

Sure seems like a 223 chamber from what I can tell. Ranier barrel the last two weekends. Original no name barrel seemed to group more uniform but still 5 inches. Most definitely marked 223 Wylde. 1 in 8 twist tried 55 grain 62 grain and 77 grain. All those should be in the range this twist should handle with aplomb. Heated the upper to get the barrel to fit if that is what you are referring to? Most definitely a tight fit in the upper receiver. Only one bolt so far. From my talks with Rainier that should not make a big difference like this. Hand loads and factory show similar results. OAL after cambering seems to be identical even on rounds that had to be assisted out. First try with the Rainier barrel was with 30 pounds on the nose since it hit perfectly on a gas tube hole. Didn't try for more on the first go round since the threads were already seated in with the first barrel. Before today I went back and torqued to 30 pounds and then to the next hole. Didn't go over 80 but was most definitely over 30. Even ruled out the trigger by going to a CMC 3.5 pound trigger. Just to cure the mental side of things added a o-ring on the pivot post to tighten up the slack (mostly between the ears). I'm confounded, Both scopes had enough magnification to make sure the cross hairs are centered in a small aiming point till the trigger breaks. The recoil only moves the gun a small amount so I can't quite watch the impact on the target. But it will put some right in there and throw some ~3 inches away high or low mostly right than left. At least left was smaller but that may be a artifact of trying to precisely dial in a scope when the group varies so much.

Just got back from the range. Tried it with no muzzle device. Swapped out to a different scope. Nothing I did changed anything. I was getting about 5 inch groups at 50 yards from a barrel that is guaranteed 1 moa. This is frustrating. I'm guessing it has to be a bad barrel? I did notice rounds once chambered had to be assisted out of the chamber by tapping the but on the bench. Could a tight 223 Wylde chamber be causing this?

jkrispies, Testing at 100 yards. Louu, Yes 90 degrees is how I torqued the barrel nut.

No offense to the shooting ability but with good bolt rifles I've been known to shoot 1/2 MOA. I'd expect better than the rifle was giving that day at least. To see what it would do I mounted a Nikon 3x9x40 for now. I may go with something else later but that should have been decent enough to wring out the rifle. I was bagging it but had a hard time keeping the grip from hitting the rear bag I was using since I had a couple stacked up. I though about the upper being off. Tried to insert a .001 shim between the flange and upper all the way around with no luck. It looks like it was seated well. I would think if it was not square it would shoot off to the side instead of all over the place.

Tried 62 grain hand loads, factory 55 grain and some IMI 79 grain. All had the same results. A CMC flat 3.5 pound trigger arrives today to rule out issues with the mil spec trigger.

I built a upper with a barrel that had good reviews but was not a big name brand and did not get good accuracy. 3 shots would be about 3.5 moa, by the time 10 shots were on paper it would open up to 6 moa. Thinking it was the barrel I replaced it with a better Rainier barrel in 223 Wylde. Tried sighting it in last weekend and it was printing all over the paper. Hard to say it grouped at all. I didn't see any patterns like vertical or horizontal stringing. Even tried a couple of different types of ammo. The barrel was tight enough in the BCM upper I had to heat the upper with a heat gun to get it in so that should not be a problem. The barrel nut hit right at a gas tube hole at 30 foot pounds so I left it the first time around. I'm using a Nordic rifle length hand guard on a intermediate length barrel with a Syrac lo pro adjustable gas block. Nothing seems to be touching anywhere. I'm using a DPMS bolt carrier group and not noticing any interference with the gas tube. After seeing poor accuracy I got to thinking the barrel nut was not tight enough so I took it apart to check it and tightened it to 30 foot pounds and then went to the next hole. So it definitely should be tight enough now. I'm not seeing any signs of strikes on the PA m4-72 comp. if it does not group well this next outing I'm at a loss to explain why. I'm using a Nikon P223 scope and Nikon mount so those "should" be ok though I am wondering about it now. I'm planning on taking another scope if I need to rule the scope out on the next outing. Any words of wisdom, 'cause I am scratching my head.