George

I have used the FinalFinish kits to firelap 4 different barrels (3 in .223, and 1 in .270), and every one of them showed improvements in accuracy. They also cleaned a lot better afterwards too! The velocity of a given loading will also be reduced due to the barrel having less resistance, and therefore the pressure, and velocity will be lower. No real problem, just up the charge a little, and you are back home. I also use the #4, and #5 grits from the FinalFinish kits as a throat maintenance system (Tubb sell these grits as the TMS system, but you get extra of these finer grits with each FinalFinish kit anyway). I shoot a couple of the fine grit bullets every 4-500 rounds on my firelapped rifles to keep throat erosion under control. I did not firelap the barrel on my JP AR as it is a lapped barrel to start with. But I do use the TMS on it to keep it accurate. BTW, the NECO firelap kits, and loaded firelapping ammo, are of poor quality compared to the Tubb grit coated bullets, and they are way pricier to boot. 5 Stars for Tubb on this product. Regards,

As Homer Simpson would say. MMMMMM, Chocolate, AND Vanilla ;~)

"Your last sentence in the first paragraph is my point exactly. You cannot drive heavy bullets to optimum velocity" ------------------------------------- Optimum, is in the eye of the beholder. 2800 plus gets all the BC you need to keep up with the wind. I understand that they are not hunting bullets, but if you desire explosive action in the terminal part of the equation, then you can order a 75 gr .223 softpoint from JLK, and eat the cake too. In a bolter with a long barrel, 3000 fps, plus is a reasonable velocity for a 75/77 in .223. In an AR type rifle, 2800-2900 would be the max. I think the main point here (from the start) was that heavy .223's do not require as much worry about wind variances at 2-400 yards, whereas the 52, and 55gr .223's will not work anywhere as well past 200 yds in a strong, variable wind. You might as well not shoot 55's at all if the .243 will give the terminal response you desire with heavies, and buck wind to boot. The point is, if ya gonna varmint with a .223, you can shoot heavies out to 3-400 yards, and still have sub-moa accuracy. Tightloop, I didn't mean to be confrontational here at all. It was .223 that was the issue here initially, so that is where my head was at concerning the possibilities inherent in this cartridge choice. Thanks.

The heavy .223 projectiles available are typically Hollow Point Boat Tail (HPBT) for aerodynamic reasons, and have the jacketing wrapped from the rear to get a smooth airflow. Not a real hunting hollow point, but a Hollow Point nonetheless. Yes they do expand, just not explosively like the 55's do. This is mostly due to the kinetic/velocity differences. The 77@ 3300 fps would expand/explode almost as well as your 55er, you just can't actually push it that fast. The Sierra 77, and 80 grainers will also buck wind with the best of the 6's, 7's, and .308's. A Sierra Matchking HPBT 77 grain projectile @ 2800 to 2850 fps will work really well at the terminal end of this situation, buck wind like a bronco, and the pressure is no worse than a 55 doing 3300, so case life is fine here. Berger, JLK, Sierra, and Hornady all make 68, 69, 70, 75, 77, 78, and 80 grain .223 bullets (all HPBT, not FMJ, or whatever you want from the custom makers). The sectional density of a long, heavy 75-80 grain .223 is as good as almost all of the bigger bullets, and only a select few of them have even the slightest edge on the real heavy .223's in anything except Power Factor. BTW, 62, 69, and 70 grainers are not really heavies, they should be actually called intermediate. 1:7, or 1:8 barrels are of course required for these babies. I have one of each, and they both shoot 55's real well to boot, but this is not always the case. 1:8 is probably better for this reason, but will not get the most out of the 80's like a 1:7 will. Regards,

One warning here. The confidence you gain with knee pads can lead to more knee trouble if you are not careful. There is a tendency to drop into a kneeling position a little harder when wearing pads than you would otherwise (why, because you can!). If you do this too much, the additional impact force can cause bad knees to become worse. The padding allows you to take impacts in stride, but the force is still applied to the kneecap, you just don't feel any pain at the time you do it. And just because you don't feel any pain, it doesn't mean you aren't getting hurt. I know this because I spent about three months rehabilitating both of my knees after I used knee pads to agressively get into position on a lot of low ports at the 2001 3 gun nationals. I am more cautious now, and treat my knees better even when padded (same goes for elbows). Beware the tendency to think you are invincible when you are wearing padding. Regards, (Edited by George at 1:48 pm on Feb. 14, 2003)

Here is a direct link to the JP Enterprises Remington 700 page. http://www.jprifles.com/rem700.htm Regards,

Just sent off my registration for the 3 gun nats, and the MOR match, and I noticed that USPSA has now divided MOR into Open, and Standard classes. Am I having a not quite senior moment here, or is this really different than it was in Vegas last year? I wasn't able to shoot the MOR event, so I don?t know for sure. No big deal really. Looks like this puts all scopes, comps, and bipods in Open, and allows for box mags to run wild in either class. Because Standard means iron sights, it looks like stripper clips will be a viable option there. I was also under the impression that pretty much everyone used optics last year. If irons & optics shoot the same course, then I am guessing that this will require lowering the difficulty level of the toughest shots to a do-able level (read visible to the naked eye) for iron sights. End result would then be Open class becoming a bit of a "speed shoot" type thing, where re-loading times will be a larger factor than before. Thats what it looks like to me anyway. I am indeed looking forward to this match. See ya all there. Regards,

Try JP Enterprises. They offer a Remington 700 that is accurized, and tweaked for a reasonable price (I think down near $1000 US, or a little bit more, the website prices are not current). Just add optics, and go for it. John Paul (owner of JP Enterprises) will also probably be able to give you a pretty good deal on any optics you want on the rifle. His Remington 700 package looks to be a winner for varminting. http://www.jprifles.com/ I would recommend .223 in a 1/8, or at most 1:9 twist. The 52's & 55's will fly pretty well at the distances they are good for, and the 69-77's will really reach out for ya. .223 is a lot cheaper to re-load, or buy loaded ammo for. The pressures are not ridiculous, so throat erosion will not having you re-barreling before too long. And, if you don't want to spring for brand spankin' new, then it's also an easy caliber to find used rifles in that will shoot really well (read "aren't shot out" here). BTW, the Leupold 6.5-20 is the cat's meow if you can afford it. They also make a good 4.5-16 (I think) that would probably work well for a couple dollars less. Regards,

I now have some repeatable times for hand loading five rounds in a Remington bolt action. Dry fire, using full weight dummy rounds, I am consistently able to get at, or just under 11 seconds. This is from snap, to snap, with a sight picture too! I repeat, these times are for FIVE rounds loaded. I made two changes to my method to get this to work consistently. First, I am using my weak hand under the receiver (palm up, fingers coming over the open side of the receiver) to push the rounds down after dropping them in place with the strong hand. I also moved my improvised 5 round, wrap-around ammo holder to the barrel, right in front of the receiver. This cuts hand motions way down. I am trying to stay as close to my actual rifle mounted position as possible during this process. This way I only have to slap the butt plate back into my shoulder pocket, grab a quick cheek weld, and figure out where the heck my next target is. These two changes made the whole process smooth as glass, and very consistent at right around 11 seconds flat. The less I rushed, and the gentler I pushed the rounds into place, the smoother, and faster I got. My other tests with the weak hand over the top of the receiver were very inconsistent, and clumsy in comparison. Now, off to the range to see what requiring a 3MOA hit at 200 yards adds to the mix. Regards,

I like this one a lot. There are three types of people in this world. Those who make things happen. Those who watch things happen. And those who wonder what happened. Regards,

Yes, Five rounds is the maximum that can be loaded at one time. I think the actual capacity can be greater, you just can't load more than five. This was probably intended to keep stripper clip fed rifles in the running (scopes make stripper clips somewhat impractical). No matter how you slice it, box magazines are a distinct advantage. Regards,

Gaming the MOR competition with manually operated AR's, Tubb 2000's, and other box magazine fed bolt actions, are all kinda out of the genuine feel that "Manually Operated Rifle" brings to my mind. I had to think about it a bit, but in the end, I realized that I would rather shoot a pure bolt action type rifle here. Maybe the initial rules are not properly stated so as to prevent it becoming a box mag battle, or do we really need divisions (Open/Limited) in MOR too. Regards,

There is a simple reason that DVD's have more involved in opening them. They are worth more than CD's so there is more incentive to go overboard in security packaging to prevent in-store theft and return fraud. Wonderful societal comment here if you dig deep enough. Regards,

The one thing I did run a timer on was putting 4, plus 1 in, and then getting back on target. On a 6" steel plate at 200 yards (3 MOA shot), shot to shot (with a hit each time, of course), I got four good runs of 11.75, 11.9, 14.6 & 10.8 seconds. The 10.8 was the only run where it went real smooth, with no bobbling (I never got under 11 seconds with dummy rounds). The 14.6 was real ugly. I am not willing to say how many times I didn't get a hit at each end ;-) Each run was started while settled in with a good sight picture. When the timer beeped, I fired one round, then did the full reload, and fired one more round, then stopped, and recorded the time before resetting for the next string. I had the modified Uncle Mikes ammo holder wrapped around the scope objective, with the base of the rounds pointing down on the strong side. I grabbed, and dropped the rounds in with the strong hand, and used the weak hand fingers over the top of the action (under a fairly high mounted scope) to push rounds down, and into place while grabbing the next round with the strong hand. It takes some practice to do both at the same time (I'm really glad no one saw my first few attempts at this at home with dummy rounds, it was really embarassing). I am pretty sure that around 10 seconds can be done consistently with enough practice (probably by someone better than me!). Anyone else have any times on something like this? Of course, now I will have to go out and see what my splits will be single loading. I had never thought about this alternative before. Hmmm! Regards,

Yeah, I did learn that on a hunting trip long, long time ago. Just never had a real use/need for it until MOR mania set in. Regards, (Edited by George at 1:36 am on Feb. 5, 2003)

The redi-mag is a visual bomb to an RO, and as such deserves to be treated separately from the shotgun thing. It makes sense to require it to be kept empty between stages. IMO, anyway. The only problem I see with the side-saddle (or slide lock, two-pack for that matter), is forgetting it's there, and winding up with ammo on the shotgun in a safe area if you un-case there. Regards, (Edited by George at 1:01 am on Feb. 5, 2003)

I would tend to think that once you are topped up, being in position and only having to work the bolt between rounds would ultimately be faster, and less distracting. I will have to test this via timer next time I am at the range with my bolter. I developed a technique that gets a fifth round in my Remington. Load four in the mag, throw the fifth forward into the chamber area, then while working the bolt forward, reach over with the weak hand and depress the top round in the mag until the bolt goes over it. Voila, you've got five! A little bit of practice makes it real fast. I took an old Uncle Mikes ammo belt pouch (type that folds open and holds two flat rows of four in elastic loops), and cut off the belt loops, folded it backwards, and put it around my weak forearm. I also modified mine to hold five rounds in the loops. A second one fits well around the front of a large objective scope. Makes the rounds real handy, and pre-oriented to boot. Regards, (Edited by George at 12:41 am on Feb. 5, 2003)

It's still true that most problems can be traced to the BIM (Biological Input Module). No matter the type/level of technology, the problems remain the same. Regards,

Looks a lot like the average service call situation I see ;~)

Absolutely, the only thing that is right on the money is data from actual range testing. The day everything technically agrees to the nth decimal point, is the day it starts to get a little boring being a tech geek. It is good to hear that Sierra is using G5 data now. I will check out Sierras BEX software. I'm always looking for more data, can't have too much of that stuff, ya know :-) BTW, when setting the drag model in the RSI software, the best results are gotten from entering actual chrono results from multiple ranges (I haven't been able to chrono further than across 125 yards so my results with this method have not been as good as they ought to be). The next best method is to actually enter exacting measurements from the projectile in question. The third best method (but actually quick & dirty in comparison) is to convert G1 data to a G5 drag model. I have been using the G1 to G5 conversion method to get "what if" data real quick. The absolute best results I have gotten were by measuring the projectile shape, and doing slight corrections to the final BC by comparing it to my actual range results (mostly at 200 yards on my local range, with occasional forays out further to confirm. I have to travel a couple of hours to get any more distance), and then settling on a BC figure where the range results and the tables match up closely. Kinda ironic. eh? The tables I posted earlier were from the G1 to G5 conversion method. Regards, (Edited by George at 12:05 pm on Jan. 29, 2003)

Hi Kurt, Just got back to reading this and wanted to mention something about the G1/G5 data comparisons. The differences do indeed track in proportion for comparison purposes. The big improvement in the G5 drag model method (only if you are using boat tailed bullets that is) is that the path predictions are pretty darned close to the actual drop and drift that you get when you start testing. I have found that most ballistic software is OK for comparison purposes, but a little weak when it comes to getting corrections that really work. The RSI software gives you the ability to re-calculate the drag coefficients in a number of different ways. Most of which are a good bit closer to reality than the standard G1 based tables are. Here is a link to the download page for the free 30 day demo of Shooting Labs software. It does a lot of other stuff for ya, but it's main feature is it's unique approach to drag models. Talk to Jim Ristow at RSI if you are interested in more about his methods. http://www.shootingsoftware.com/ftp.htm Regards, (Edited by George at 4:18 am on Jan. 29, 2003)

At close range (5-40 yards), most everything seems to shoot to the same point of aim. I can shoot 55's, and 69/77's at under 50 yards with my red dot and get pretty much a wash (I zeroed the red dot with the 69 grain Match King @ 40 yards). My JP open rifle (20" 1:8), shoots the Sierra 69, and the Sierra 77 to same point of aim at 200 yards (there is about a 1/2" group center offset up, and to the left for the 69's, but that's OK with me, at 200 yards I always use the 77 anyway). The powder charges in the 69 grain loading were adjusted slightly to tune this. My 55 grain FMJBT load @ 3150 fps needs 1 MOA of downward sight correction from the 69/77 loadings to be on at 200 yards. In matches, I shoot 69's on the hoser stages, and use the 77's on all stages that have long distance shooting involved. The 55's feel so different in recoil impulse that I won't use them for practice anyway. Regards,

I am of the opinion that an A2 type rear aperture sight, with an standard post front is the fastest setup overall. I am experimenting with a Lyman globe type front sight on my flat top right now, and it is super accurate using an A2 type rear sight. There are gas blocks that will mount a front sight, and there are adapter blocks that go over the barrel in front of the gas block. I think the increased sight radius of the add on front mount over the gas block mount is an advantage. Armalite makes a standard AR type front that goes on rail. JP makes barrel, and gas block front sight mounts, along with a modified Lyman globe type front site setup (the one I am presently testing on a Limited upper). You can get an carry handle with sight from DPMS, or Fulton Armory. I've got an A2 type rear sight without the handle, that mounts right on rail (it only has 11 MOA of elevation adjustment, so the complete handle setup is better if you need the full range of adjustment). You can also also mount a full on match type rear aperture sight with an adapter block. Lotsa combinations available then. -- Regards,

Here are two shareware pop-up blockers for OS9 that really work. http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/mac/17216 http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/mac/15845 Here is a freeware content blocker that seems to work OK, at the expense of keeping a companion program running behind your browser. http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/mac/14397 Regards,

Hmmmm! Now you've really got me thinking about this. I am just going to have to boot one of my machines back into 9 and check this out. I will report back after I beat my head flat against the Big MS. Regards,