Major Pf In A Standard Ar Upper

[ken hebert]

Excuse me if this has been done before, but I didn't really find it in a search...

Is it viable (hypothetically) to use a caliber such as .300-221/.300 Whisper to make major? Or some other that I haven't named? Searched, and found references to a 30TC... But that was shot down in favor of the Whisper. Through pages and pages of looking I never hear mention of such an application seriously. Is it simply more viable to just go ahead and make minor with .223 Rem/5.56mm because of availability and the fact that it is so common?

I ask because I'm in the process of ordering a .300 Whisper now, with a 1 in 8 twist to stabilize 220-240 gn rounds in conjunction with a supressor, but I can't help but wonder as to the application of the round in 3-gun or multigun. IMO, say a 150 gn btsp moving at 2100fps in a 1 in 10 twist 16" AR... Seems like it would have all the advantages: major PF and high capacity in readily available mags (works in standard AR mags) 30's, 40's, 45's, and beta-c's.

What am I not seeing? Surely someone else has tried this or something like it. I realise it's a handload only round, but...

[bigbrowndog]

Ken, this subject has been discussed alot. For, our purposes in order to make major, is one thing, most people would want to comfortably be above major. A 150 gr. bullet requires 2133fps to just make major, for me I would prefer 2200fps for a minimum margin. SSK lists 2073fps as maximum for a 150gr bullet from a rifle(COTW 10th ed.) For my purposes it doesn't work with a 150gr bullet.

If you can get 2200fps, or make 330PF some other way, then you have figured out something that nobody else has.

Trapr

[George]

Yeah, big +1 to Trapr's observation. 2100fps just isn't enough for a 150 grain to make the major rifle floor (320,000). That round is tapped out at that point and that's all she wrote.

[ken hebert]

Trapr, I was throwing those numbers out in general, not as in what I'd figured out would work. You say this has been discussed alot already. Meaning here on this forum? Or amongst other knowledgeable shooters in person? If here, then I've got some more digging to do.

You seem to be saying that it's not really feasable to do. I wasn't meaning to just limit my discussion to the .300 Whisper, I'd like to hear of other options, if anyone is so inclined to do so. Bear in mind I've never actually shot a weapon chambered in this cartridge, and am unaware of the recoil, i.e. I don't really know how quickly follow-up shots may be made for sporting purposes. I am, however, aware that this round does have an "arcing" trajectory, has a considerable drop at (round numbers, here) 300 yards. Zero at 100, 16" drop at 300 (I'm guessing here guys, don't berate me too terribly if I'm far off). This is what I've been told, regarding the heavier, subsonic loads.

As Trapr said earlier, "If you can get 2200fps, or make 330PF some other way, then you have figured out something that nobody else has." Realistically, what should I be considering here? Lighter bullet going faster (flatter trajectory), heavier bullet going slower (softer shooting?), other considerations? I'm guessing it would possibly be cost-prohibitive...

Bullet weights and velocities to make major (320PF):

150gn @ 2133 fps

168gn @ 1904 fps

180gn @ 1778 fps

190gn @ 1685 fps

200gn @ 1600 fps

220gn @ 1455 fps

240gn @ 1334 fps

As long as we're talking here, and talking is still free, how about 7.62x39?

[uscbigdawg]

That was the hope with 6.8SPC, but our own Zak Smith is the man on load data on it and don't believe he's reached it yet. Don't know about 6.5 Grendel too much but I'll be reading a lot more about it while I'm down range. Something about it has me intrigued. There were discussions by some of us locally of an AR in .243 WSSM, but like the 6.8 the downside is reduced mag capacity. Not a huge deal, but kinda an issue.

The big with the 243 is brass availability/affordability, reliability of the rifle and the question of what are you REALLY gaining. Yeah major vs. minor is big especially in rifle. However, since the field is really shooting the same scoring as +90% it's less of an issue. If shooting a major PF rifle is of big concern, seriously just look at at .308 or .260. Major PF, compact rifle options available and great accuracy.

My LR-308 is going to be a .308, but will probably have a 18" barrel. Just don't want it that long and it's more of a gee-whiz rifle until the day I ever get crazy and shoot Heavy Metal Trooper Class with Russell!

Rich

[bigbrowndog]

Ken, I can't recall if the discussions were on this forum or elsewhere(i thought it was here). As far as making major, with something other than a .223 based cartridge, you tend to lose out in capacity, and available, good reliable magazines.

If you are looking for just a good caliber to use, the 300 Whisper is one of those, and yes the trajectory using sub-sonic heavy bullets is similar to that of a 22lr. I have experience with .338 Whisper in a bolt gun, and for a general purpose/light hunting gun it is nice. The developer of the Whisper cartridges will tell you that they were developed to be used with heavy low drag bullets at sub-sonic velocities, using them at supersonic velocities defeats the purpose.

There has been the promise of a cartridge that will make major PF, and not lose capacity, that will turn the 3 gun world upside down for the last few years. Sadly, or thankfully, we have seen some very good rounds come out, but none have delivered on the promise.

If you want to shot major, easily. Shoot a .308, and compete in Heavy Metal. There are alot of really good guys shooting in that division, that would be more than happy to help you out.

trapr

[George]

Here is the USA, there really is almost no reason whatsoever to shoot major caliber rifles at IMGA rules run matches (Time+ scoring) because there is NO advantage in points and there IS a disadvantage to the extra recoil.

In USPSA rules run matches (Comstock scoring), there is a points advantage on paper targets, but the recovery time for the second shot on every target kills you speedwise. It is NOT an even trade except for in special cases (Kurt, where are you). The long distance targets are where any reason for large caliber rifles goes right out the window. We shoot at steel almost exclusively beyond 75-100 yards and steel only needs to flash/fall to score. Because it has to flash/fall for minor as well as major and all competitors have to shoot the same targets, the .223 really takes the larger calibers lunch money here. No contest in the overall, the .223 rules the roost here in the US.

In World IPSC where the primary targets are paper even at long distance, major rifles are competitive because they pick up ground when there is no steel to counteract the superior points gathering curve of the big bore guns.

[tverho]

Even with international IPSC rules major rifles are not competitive. They are just too slow to shoot and good shooters shoot too few C or D shots even at 200 - 300 meters distance to make major worthwile. _If_ the power factor required for major scoring went significantly down and/or the points scheme were to be adjusted, major might become an alternative in cartridges like 6.5 Grendel, 6.8SPC, 7.62X39 or like.

Until that moment international IPSC competitions top10 scores will stay dominated by 5.56.

t tommi

[George]

Even with international IPSC rules major rifles are not competitive. They are just too slow to shoot and good shooters shoot too few C or D shots even at 200 - 300 meters distance to make major worthwile. _If_ the power factor required for major scoring went significantly down and/or the points scheme were to be adjusted, major might become an alternative in cartridges like 6.5 Grendel, 6.8SPC, 7.62X39 or like.

Until that moment international IPSC competitions top10 scores will stay dominated by 5.56.

t tommi

Well, there you have it, major is not even as competitive as I thought it was over in Europe and they don't use anywhere near as much steel as we do!

I do know for a fact that anything but the .223 is a definite waste of time if'n ya' wanna' race seriously over here!

[mike_pinto]

George,

Do you ever sleep? :D

Mike

[Overkill]

Because it has to flash/fall for minor as well as major and all competitors have to shoot the same targets, the .223 really takes the larger calibers lunch money here. No contest in the overall, the .223 rules the roost here in the US.

The uncompetetiveness of major caliber rifles really IS a problem. Part of what makes our sport "a good thing" is the innovation it generates that trickles down ( or "UP" maybe) to serious applications. The scoring in rifle right now has created a situation where there's no reasonable expectation that you can be competetive with anything but a AR/223. Locking the sport into a single caliber and platform will eventually make the sport as irrelevent to the bigger picture as NRA Bullseye competetion.

General LeMay's undue reverence for the watermelon test aside....a rifle really is about power. I think scoring should at least permit, maybe even slightly favor, a major caliber rifle. I think properly honoring the DVC principal suggests a modification of the steel scoring for rifle....heck maybe pistol too. Something on the order of making steel targets worth 8 points for minor, full 10 points for major seems appropriate.

Edited December 22, 2006 by Overkill

[bigbrowndog]

Ok, now we're ADRIFT'n

Ken, if you would like to discuss, other calibers i'm sure we could continue on whatever your train of thought is, in regards to 3 gun calibers.

Scoring changes, is another topic that revolves and evolves about as much as who/what killed the dinosaurs and the where is ATLANTIS? .......................IMO!

Trapr

[ken hebert]

Trapr, it's not that I'm trying to push a dead issue or one that has no viable solution, it's just that the purchase of the .300 Whisper got all kinds of ideas floating around in my noggin. This place is a great arena to flesh out such ideas, see if they are viable. If this had went somewhere, then I'd look into purchasing another upper with a slower twist for lighter rounds, but as of now it looks like I just better stick with the fast twist/heavy projectile/supressor line of thinking. This of course will not be for USPSA, but for my own gratuitous needs. It is X-mas afterall.

I hate to stir the pot anymore, but this mornings line of thought is a Tromix rigged up Saiga/AK in 7.62x39, and the large drum mags ala RPK. But again, this probably ain't done for a reason that I'll figure out later.

For now, I'll stick with my .223 AR's. One of which was put together solely from the ideas I got here on this forum. So, yes, this novice is listening, and appreciates all of you who have come before, been there and done that so that we don't have to learn the hard way.

BTW Trapr, we shot Space City 2004 on the same squad, had a good time there. For those of you who haven't met Trapr, his shooting companion is the infamous big brown dog who has his own ear plugs and sits in a folding chair along side his boss. Highly entertaining weekend.

Edited December 22, 2006 by ken hebert

[bigbrowndog]

Ken, the name sounded familar but, its been a long time since I shot SC. A Whisper for gratuitous reasons is reason enough.

If I can be of further assistance, or aid in further discussion let me know.

As I type this "Scout" is trying to figure out how to get himself up a tree to get dove. I keep telling him the season's over..............

Trapr

[Overkill]

Ok, now we're ADRIFT'n

Ken, if you would like to discuss, other calibers i'm sure we could continue on whatever your train of thought is, in regards to 3 gun calibers.

Scoring changes, is another topic that revolves and evolves about as much as who/what killed the dinosaurs and the where is ATLANTIS? .......................IMO!

Trapr

I'm not trying to drag the thread off course, but merely pointing out how absurd it is that USPSA scoring so completely favors the 223 that any attempt to move away from that standard dooms you.

[George]

George,

Do you ever sleep? :D

Mike

Nope, there'll be time for that when I'm dead ;-)

merely pointing out how absurd it is that USPSA scoring so completely favors the 223 that any attempt to move away from that standard dooms you.

Moto GP racing also favors a specific amount of horsepower, pushing a specific weight range of machine on a similar chassis setup to everyone else racing the same race. Same for NASCAR, F1 and Motocross. It is absolutely incorrect to say that USPSA scoring favors the .223 cartridge over a larger round. If that was true, the IMGA matches would have lots of the top folks using major rifles. This is NOT the case, ergo USPSA rules are not the issue, end of story.

This is racing plain and simple and racing demands competitive performance from the machinery. Until something else becomes competitive that's the way it is. The rules don't control this much at all. The "need for speed" has more say in what is used to garner that speed than than any other factor PERIOD

Race what you want to, if it keeps up, great! If not, oh well, try something else ;-)

[Overkill]

Some sports make very specific equipment rules as a way of standardizing equipment to remove it to the greatest extent possible as a variable in the competetion; GSSF and the racing sports you mentioned. And that's ok. But one of the things I've always liked about the practical shooting competetion was that it encourages innovation; there's more than one way to skin a cat. You can shoot a light gun and transition fast or a heavy gun that shoots flat. You can shoot quickly an accurately with a light caliber, or earn some room for sloppy shooting by tolerating some recoil. Innovation and testing of equipment and technique was one of the objectives that was built into the sport at its founding. The rules should be tweeked as necessary to facilitate those objectives. When was the last time a major match was won with something other than a 223 AR? Is that a good thing?

[George]

The issues at hand are scoring related and until a larger caliber can garner more Points Per Second, all of the time, they won't be competitive.

Now the $64 question: Do "we" want the scoring systems in use (USPSA & IMGA) changed? The "we" in use there is all of the couple thousand folks doing this thing called 3gun/multigun.

Howzabout a show of hands: Who's happy with the scoring as is? Who's not?

Many options designed to let major score better have been proffered here before. They all involve differentiating the rate at which major rifles can gather points (raising their Points Per Second gathering value) compared to minor scoring rifles, or in some cases lowering the number oof rounds required to finalize engagement of a target when shooting major.

So the next question is: Who decides whether the major rifle can gather Points Per Second equal to the mousegun (and what is equal), or better and if better, by how much.

And why, so something that can't run the course and keep up now can be "made" to keep up with a new math handicap applied. Now lets make the ole' .45 a winner in the pistol matches again by somehow legislating it back to the top oof the heap in the PPS (points per second) roundup ;-)

[Overkill]

By that logic, we could lower the minor PF to "3 photons", enchange heavy expensive steel targets for cheep reflective cloth and make all the ARs uncompetetive compared to the keychain laser pointers that would suddenly capture the rifle class. Its not all about maximizing points per second. This IS, or at least is suposed to be, a "Martial" art. Enegry on target counts in the real world and it should count in this sport.

The question "we" need to answer is not whether or not the scoring system should be change. The question "we" need to answer is, do we want our sport to remain on the cutting edge practical weapon technology and use. I realize its kind of stupid, but I'm proud of the fact that my sport led the way on the development and use red dot sights that our soldiers are using to great effect in the latest conflict. Likewise I'm proud of the fact that the best shooters in our sport train high speed police and military units how to shoot faster and more accurately using methods developed in competetion. I think its also really cool that our sport lead the police away from revolvers and into autoloaders and then into high cap medium caliber autoloaders. I think if we want to continue to be innovators rather that followers we should have a rule set that encourages innovation. Right now the DOD is flailing about trying to find a cartridge that will be more effective than the 223 but retain some of the advantages the 223 has over the 308. It would be really nice if 3-Gun competetors had already discovered that cartridge that delivers the right blend of trajectory, accuracy, capacity, and shootability. Unfortunately, as this thread demonstrates, the innappropriately placed artificial constraints we have codified, stifled innovation rather than rewarding it. You said it yourself "No contest in the overall, the .223 rules the roost here in the US." The fact that that's set in stone decided I think is sad and diminishes our sport by a regretable ammount.

[George]

If I was needing a fast handling rifle with a bit more punch than a .223 pushin' a 55gr, I think a 1:8 bbl AR pushing a 75-77 grain projectile at 2700fps+ would be a great blend of added downrange punch coupled with all the great things AR's bring to the table.

A SMK77 at 2700fps delivers a 207 PF at the muzzle and just over a 150pf at 300 yards.

A 55gr FMJBT provides a 170.5pf at the muzzle, but only a 114.2pf at 300 yards. The difference here is why the .223 with a 55er up front sux in the real world at anything but CQ range. A really heavy projectile would go a really long way towards making the .223 a whole lot more effective in the world.

The 62grain move the military made helped a tad, but nowhere near enough. If I had to rely on an AR stoked with 77's at 2700fps plus, I would NOT feel terribly under-rifled.

BTW, this recipe is what I bring to matches as my standard fodder for any stage with 100 yard plus engagement. I additionally use SMK69's at 2800fps exclusively for CQ stages. I DO NOT shoot mousegun loads in competition ;-)

[TLD]

If I was needing a fast handling rifle with a bit more punch than a .223 pushin' a 55gr, I think a 1:8 bbl AR pushing a 75-77 grain projectile at 2700fps+ would be a great blend of added downrange punch coupled with all the great things AR's bring to the table.

A SMK77 at 2700fps delivers a 207 PF at the muzzle and just over a 150pf at 300 yards.

A 55gr FMJBT provides a 170.5pf at the muzzle, but only a 114.2pf at 300 yards. The difference here is why the .223 with a 55er up front sux in the real world at anything but CQ range. A really heavy projectile would go a really long way towards making the .223 a whole lot more effective in the world.

The 62grain move the military made helped a tad, but nowhere near enough. If I had to rely on an AR stoked with 77's at 2700fps plus, I would NOT feel terribly under-rifled.

BTW, this recipe is what I bring to matches as my standard fodder for any stage with 100 yard plus engagement. I additionally use SMK69's at 2800fps exclusively for CQ stages. I DO NOT shoot mousegun loads in competition ;-)

There is such a round used in the military, but not gereral issue, yet.

There are clubs that hold matches that are more "tactical" attempting to bring more martial spirit into play. 3 gun race rifles have a place, but doesn't the heavy metal divisions and combat type matches bring the whole thing back to center?

But I understand, everyone shoots for THE fastest time. No one aspires to say "I won the 600 nitro express double rifle division at 12 minutes and 15 seconds." Unless, of course, he is practicing to go elephant hunting.

[Wakal]

There are clubs that hold matches that are more "tactical" attempting to bring more martial spirit into play. 3 gun race rifles have a place, but doesn't the heavy metal divisions and combat type matches bring the whole thing back to center?

Tactical?

Umm...

Have you been eyeballing what crunchies are toting around in the Sandbox these days?

Just for entertainment value, pick which "AR15 shaped" gun is "tactical" and which is for "competition":

- Compensated 16" flattop with dual optics and a compensator, adjustable stock, rail forend

- Compensated 14.5" flattop with dual optics and a compensator, adjustable stock, rail forend

I'm all for shooting bigger bullets and have been involved in the San Angelo Brain Trust in trying to figure a better mouse(gun)trap for years, but lets keep the "gamer" v. "tacticool" discussion out of this thread. Real guys are shooting real gomers in the real world with what the folks who have never smelled burning bodies call "gamer" guns even as we speak.

Alex

[Mike P]

The issues at hand are scoring related and until a larger caliber can garner more Points Per Second, all of the time, they won't be competitive.

Now the $64 question: Do "we" want the scoring systems in use (USPSA & IMGA) changed? The "we" in use there is all of the couple thousand folks doing this thing called 3gun/multigun.

Howzabout a show of hands: Who's happy with the scoring as is? Who's not?

Many options designed to let major score better have been proffered here before. They all involve differentiating the rate at which major rifles can gather points (raising their Points Per Second gathering value) compared to minor scoring rifles, or in some cases lowering the number oof rounds required to finalize engagement of a target when shooting major.

So the next question is: Who decides whether the major rifle can gather Points Per Second equal to the mousegun (and what is equal), or better and if better, by how much.

And why, so something that can't run the course and keep up now can be "made" to keep up with a new math handicap applied. Now lets make the ole' .45 a winner in the pistol matches again by somehow legislating it back to the top oof the heap in the PPS (points per second) roundup ;-)

Well, I kind of like the time plus scoring used at Ft. Benning. My preference would be to change it to where a point value must be achieved for neutralization sort of like the Paladin/IDPA system so that 2 D's won't cut it. That I think also cures some of the percieved mag capacity inequities by allowing a shooter to decide whether to shoot A's or to reload. Or use something similar to the Cav-arms time plus where the .30 cal only requires one C hit to neutralize.

The power factors for major are to me so ridiculously low that you may as well not have them. Just set the steel to fall with minor loads and be done with it.

As far as the .30 cal vs .223 debate goes, I'll only say that most people can't get aimed hits reliably much past the .223's effective range anyway (me too) so what difference does the bullet size/power/penetration/teminal effectiveness make. A miss with a bazooka is still a miss.

That said, there's really no reason to standardize rules or scoring systems. Let the people putting on the match decide and post the rules with the application, then as individuals we can decide to participate or not, and what weapon(s) to bring for the best result.

Mike

[bigbrowndog]

ALEX, its the PINK one..........................

Keep your butt down, happy holidays

Trapr/Scout

On the subject of burning things, If you close your eyes and forget where you are, doesn't it smell just like a BBQ. Thats what it reminds me of, kind of eerie.

Edited December 24, 2006 by bigbrowndog

[Wakal]

LOL...

Am I wrong to find it amusing that animals that don't eat pork for various mythological reasons still smell mostly like...a pork BBQ?

Talk about thread drift!

OK, smart folks...can you push a 7.62 by 39 fast enough to make Major?

A