Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

mrd

Classifieds
  • Posts

    240
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mrd

  1. I round off or hold between the hash marks. For A-zones inside 400 yards that is close enough for me, but I like to keep it simple. I'd dial if I was shooting golf balls or +400 yards. I played around with the MRAD reticle and Strelok+. For my rifle and ammo, I think I would use a 65 meter zero with this reticle. Then it would shoot about two inches low from 5 to 15 meters and at most 0,6" high out to 150. Really no need to compensate from 40 to ~180 meters. Hold for A-mark/shoulder on target for 200 (where it shoots 1.8" low,) use start of lower hash cross for 250. Then 300, 400, 500, 550, 600, 650, 700 meters line up quite close with the full hash marks, the half hash marks are usable for the distances in between.
  2. This is my Stock 2 AU that I've been running for almost five years now, the latest three in Limited. It used to be in chrome, now it is ceracoted in Cobolt and Armor Black. This pic was taken when it was just back from the paint job, haven't even the front sight in place. Since then I've swapped out the Unica mag release for a custom one to avoid accidental mag ejections.
  3. Sorry, it is one of a kind, a friend helped me make it as a favor. He milled the top off an original mag release and welded an oversized piece of metal on it. I cut it to my liking myself with a dremel, kept grinding it down until I didn't get accidental ejections anymore while I could still reach the mag release without shifting my grip. You can see in the pic how it turned out. (I know, I should have it ceracoted flat black to match.) Even if I could have one more made, I could not ship it. I'm in Europe and shipping weapon parts to or from the US is a barrel full of red tape. I'm normally having the opposite problem, wanting custom parts from the US, such as the Overwatch Precision trigger for the PPQ, but being unable to get them here. I can advise using a stiff magazine release spring helps some with the Unica.
  4. It extends more rearward and is higher/more out from the grip. Too much out, even, at least for me. When I had it I sometimes ejected the magazine unintentionally by gripping hard. I have a custom made extended mag release now that is not as big and it works without such mishaps. I wish they made it so it only extended rearward without being higher. Also a little smaller would be good.
  5. I shoot a lot indoors too and I think that with well-lit targets and varying light where you shoot, it is even more valuable to have a fiber optic front sight. I generally have an easier time to focus on the FO sight, the light and contrast helps me a lot. When the targets are well lit it actually makes it harder for me to focus on the sight - especially if it is black, and even more so if there is poor light above/behind the shooting position. With good lightning above and behind me, so the back of the front sight gets lit up, I can manage with a black front sight. But in poor light, as is often the case, the FO helps.
  6. Yeah, don't compete with untested stuff. Also, freebore can vary between individual barrels. You need to plunk test every new load/bullet with your chambers to find out what OAL you can use. Did you?
  7. Yeah, lots of buffer tubes (even more expensive ones), are not smooth inside and that makes for a lot of noise. I got a Bravo Company tube in the end that was really smooth. I tried Brownells and ALG tubes before and they were far from smooth. On top of that you can polish the outside of the spring, but you need a smooth tube first. Some grease on the spring also helps to quiet it down, not too much though. But beware that grease attracts dust and dirt, not for duty use.
  8. For us who'd rather read about the best 3-gun scopes, could you please make the discount requests in PM instead of the thread?
  9. I have a 16" and it seems to like ammo in the 145-160 PF range., at least in regard to accuracy. I have no feeding issues with any loads, but the rifle have only run about 1500 rounds.
  10. Sounds great! I understand it's hard to cram everything into one review. I just think those I mentioned are the best LPVO's currently, even though they are SFP, and the ones I want to see the Vortex compared to. Totally agree on the March. They should make a reticle where only the center dot illuminates.
  11. Great review! Only thing I missed was a comparison to the other actual top contenders of LPVO's: Swarovski, Kahles and Zeiss (all 1-8x variety) - while being SFP scopes these do have better FOV than the Vortex. It would also have been interesting to see how it stacks up against the March 1-10x, thought that is a bit different beast with parallax adjustment etc.
  12. +1 on all accounts. Would also be interested to hear the specs of Maxamundo's rifle, the buffer system in particular - if he doesn't mind sharing of course.
  13. I have mine setup the same way. Setting a zero distance so the highest point of the trajectory is only about 0,5-10" higher (something within the error of margin for our shooting) than where I zero will provide for a wider range around the zero distance where you don't have to compensate. Then you will have two zeros and a negligible hold-under in between.
  14. I this was my AR15, I would weep. But well, this is my "tack driving load" for my CMMG... 25 m = 27.3 yards 19 mm = 0,75 inches, center to center. 8-shot groups, shot rested with bean bag in front of receiver, scope with 20x magnification I have better scope and mounts now, will test at 50 and 100 meters when opportunity presents.
  15. Polymer gun for Limited, I'm not surprised this one is dead in the water.
  16. Yeah, a strong tactile reset is very important. I used to have a Uronen trigger. In every respect except strong reset, I'd say it's the best trigger on the market. The crispest break you could imagine, VERY short reset and adjustable pre- and overtravel - from zero to more than you want. BUT shooting it fast, I got trigger freeze now and then. I think the reset was too short (yes, I think a reset could be too short) and not tactile enough. I switched it out for a Hiperfire Eclipse. Not as nice (for the trigger snob in me), but no more trigger freeze. I always know where I am in the trigger movement with the Hiperfire.
  17. I haven't tried your bullets but I have the CMMG and it needs the shortest OAL of my 9x19's. It's ridicolous. After all the sloppy QC in my CMMG rifle I will hesitate to buy again. I tried a Clymer reamer but that did nothing to the throat, only wore on the reamer. Barrel is nitrided, tell the gunsmith about it before so he's prepared. He'll probably need a carbide reamer.
  18. Agree , but I prefer MRAD. The jury is still out on how forgiving the Vortex 1-10x is, though. For me, the ultimate 3-gun scope has Vortex reticle, FFP, MRAD/MRAD, 1-10x magnification with FOV, glass quality, eye box and weight equal or better than the Swaro 1-8x. Of course FOV and eye box won't be as good as 10x as the Swaro on 8x, but equal or better at the same magnification.
  19. I have a Lothar Walther 16.5" polygonal rifled barrel with rifle length gas. I used to run it with a full mass bolt carrier, adjustable gas and two coils off the carbine buffer spring. Now I have a JP LMOS steel carrier and slightly gutted buffer, same spring. I've never had any problems with it what so ever.
  20. In my book it's between Swaro 1-8x BRT and Vortex 1-10x. Swaro is SFP, has better FOV and lower weight. Vortex is very robust, is FFP and has higher magnification (at least on paper). Has anyone compared the true max magnification between the Swaro 1-8x and the Vortex 1-10x ? In my experience one manufacturers 10x can somehow magnify less than another manufacturers 8x. Stated magnification is not always true magnification.
  21. https://www.shootersconnectionstore.com/TACCOM-ULW-9MM-MUZZLE-BREAK-P4612.aspx
  22. Sounds about right, MoRivera. The dinging was not my own idea, I read about the feed ramp dinging the bullets somewhere. I remember someone posting a picture with bullets that had indentions in the lower part of the nose from the edge on the lower part of the feed ramp. My bullets did not get dinged that bad, but I could for sure see markings and scratches on my bullets after ejecting unfired rounds. If dinging was part of the problem it would also explain why accuracy was more improved with softer bullets, like plated, than with FMJ's. But considering how sloppy the barrel to reciever fit was, I think this was part of the problem too.
  23. Check this thread to see what I did to make my CMMG more accurate. I think the feed ramp and the sloppy fit between the barrel and reciever are the biggest problems for CMMG accuracy. Mine runs the Glock mags. My CMMG 16" Resolute 200 likes the Frontier 121 gr FP bullet the best of every bullet I have tried, it has a little harder and thicker plating than most plated bullets. I use the Frontier bullet with 4.8 gr of N340 or 4.0 gr of N320 - haven't settled on a winner there yet. I've had 10-shot groups measure 0.8" center-to-center at 27 yards (25 meters) with this load. LOS 123 gr FP over 3.9 gr N320 is my practice load, it groups 1.5"@27 yards. Factory Geco 124 gr FMJ also run accurately in mine, but they are a litte hot at 156 PF. Generally, my CMMG seems to like medium weight bullets around 120-125 grains loaded to 140-145 PF.
  24. I enjoy your posts Henk, and I like that you actually test and compare stuff. Keep up the good work! I'm a firm believer in upward ports only for a PCC comp, but I've only compared the CMMG original flash hider style comp and the Taccom ULW style comp I presently use. I also time the ports to about 1:30. Will the aluminum hold up, you think? It's not the favored material with handgun open comps, but probably longer PCC barrels are not as hard on the material.
  25. In a perfect world, I'd agree with you 100%. However, I live in Europe. I waited 3 months for the dealer to get the rifle. The dealer is the only one in the country selling CMMG, and he is terrible at communicating. CMMG themselves have no stellar track record of taking care of customers either, from what I've read. Even if the dealer and CMMG would actually adress my problems promptly, I'd probably have to wait months before my barrel or its replacement would return into my possesion again. Things being as they are, I prefer to try to fix things myself most of the time. Most of the time it works, too. But will certainly not recommend CMMG to anyone either, quite the opposite in fact. The RDB is nice (as long as the extractor works) and it feeds flawlessly from the Glock mags, but that's about it. Pretty much everything else is terrible tolerances, sloppy fit and waaay too much money for what you get. @MemphisMechanic: In my experience, reaming the throat longer has no measurable effect on accuracy and accuracy was not my reason to ream. I just wanted to be able to load longer and use a wider range of bullets. Wish I had access to one of those tungsten reamers. I agree that 1.5" at 25 yards is not great, but like you say - it's plenty adequate for the sport. I just hope manufacturers are not getting sloppy with their work just because the sport does not hang on accuracy. I'm sure a rifle in 9x19 is easily capable of sub 2 MOA accuracy with the right load and I see no reason why a rifle in the price range of a CMMG should fall short of this.
×
×
  • Create New...