AR-15 and Variants

[oli700]

But a .270 isn't enough to justify it.

.450-400 might be though...

"The .270 Winchester makes a nice “pop-boom” sound. The handloaded 150 grain Hornady spirepoint left the muzzle at 2960 fps and hit the Black Wildebeest high through the shoulder at a slight quartering angle backwards. He fell over, swished his tail a couple times, and that was it. He made the record book, and is a very handsome trophy."
http://rifleshooter.com/2011/06/the-270-in-africa/
just for lol'z

I was thinking a new AR for me would be .308 win, which means the AR-10 sniper platform.
There's the $$$ I was dodging....
It could be a $5k build If I save my shekels for a year or so.
Or I raid my retirement account, which seems more and more likely.

sound like a plan....just make sure to get that trigger time....$10,000 builds wont get you there.....

 

[CaddmannQ]

Well that's what retirement is for.
Shootin' club tour of the west coast....

Also, I know the .270 is a very respected round.
I didn't want to pee on your cornflakes bud.
I was just showing off my greedy nature.

As in "Why do you carry a .45?"
"Because they don't make a .46."

Unfortunately, Ruger probably won't build that .47

 

[oli700]

oh, nothing on my flakes, I run a 30-06 for killn

 

[CaddmannQ]

It's pretty amazing, the popularity of that 110 year old cartridge.
.30-30 is fading, but .30-'06 is still going so strong.

 

[oli700]

yeah, its one of those cartridges that cant really do anything wrong......308Win is nipping at the heals of it though. With just a slight disadvantage at the very top of performance, but in a much smaller package.

 

[aksavanaman]

yeah, its one of those cartridges that cant really do anything wrong......308Win is nipping at the heals of it though. With just a slight disadvantage at the very top of performance, but in a much smaller package.

.30-06 for me! You see... I don't mind my package a little bigger

 

[CaddmannQ]

There was a guy at the range Sunday shooting a .45-70 Buffalo Gun.

Oh Lord! That thing could rock the house.

Unfortunately I didn't get a good look at it. I was too busy diddling around with my new AR, trying to hit the 200 & 300-yard gongs with a 4 Power Scope, LOL.

We have a class F range that goes 300, 600, 800, 1000 yards, but I have not yet been there. You have to make an appointment to go up there and you have to join the high power shooting club. It's strictly prone shooting, & no benches.

 

[oli700]

.30-06 for me! You see... I don't mind my little package bigger

FTFY

There was a guy at the range Sunday shooting a .45-70 Buffalo Gun.

Oh Lord! That thing could rock the house.

Unfortunately I didn't get a good look at it. I was too busy diddling around with my new AR, trying to hit the 200 & 300-yard gongs with a 4 Power Scope, LOL.

We have a class F range that goes 300, 600, 800, 1000 yards, but I have not yet been there. You have to make an appointment to go up there and you have to join the high power shooting club. It's strictly prone shooting, & no benches.

I had shot a 45-70 in a Contender set up.....shot it 3 times handed it back and said that is neat as I was thinking that is not fun in any way, he look at me and said..."most people only shoot it once , that thing isnt fun to shoot lol"

that sounds like a cool long range, prone only got to piss off most the retirees ....I shoot better prone from a bipod than I do from a bench on a bipod, but prefer the bench for bags

How did you do with the 4X ? I run a 6X out to 600 yards but its only because the reticle not the power , the power is just enough to tell your shooting the right target ......

 

[CaddmannQ]

I had shot a 45-70 in a Contender set up.....shot it 3 times handed it back and said that is neat as I was thinking that is not fun in any way, he look at me and said..."most people only shoot it once , that thing isnt fun to shoot lol"

that sounds like a cool long range, prone only got to piss off most the retirees....I shoot better prone from a bipod than I do from a bench on a bipod, but prefer the bench for bags

How did you do with the 4X ? I run a 6X out to 600 yards but its only because the reticle not the power , the power is just enough to tell your shooting the right target ......

I shoot better prone myself, never tried it with the bipod though.
My eyes are so bad that I am only good to 50 yards with the 4x Leupold AR scope.

I'm OK at 100 yds but much better with a 6~9x.
200 yds with the 9x is do-able, but I could sure use a better quality scope at that range.
At 300 yds, I need something much better. High quality 14x60mm at least, and maybe 20x; but it's going on the AR, and the 4x AR scope is going back on the .22 Henry rifle.

I'm putting a 6~9x40mm Leupold on the .30-30, and that will be very good for 50~150 yds, which is about what a .30-30 carbine can do for me anyhow.

 

[oli700]

I hear ya on the eye thing, I really been noticing it for about two years.....just slowly getting a little harder to focus . I wouldn't mind more magnification on my long AR but I just cant commit to a total long range set up. So I try for both , 1-6x is great up close and great out far but not awesome anywhere if that makes since....jack of all trades master of none.
Its all in the reticle, at known yards it works, at 600 it feels a bit like a wing and a prayer visually but hits every time.That is the furthest I have taken it, the reticle goes to 800Y. The scope clears my vision pretty good just not much of it.....its a fighting scope, but I don't fight lol....I try to group with it. Stupid really but effective for what it was invented for I suppose

 

[LAZY EYED SNIPER]

I shoot better prone myself, never tried it with the bipod though.
My eyes are so bad that I am only good to 50 yards with the 4x Leupold AR scope.

I'm OK at 100 yds but much better with a 6~9x.
200 yds with the 9x is do-able, but I could sure use a better quality scope at that range.
At 300 yds, I need something much better. High quality 14x60mm at least, and maybe 20x; but it's going on the AR, and the 4x AR scope is going back on the .22 Henry rifle.

I'm putting a 6~9x40mm Leupold on the .30-30, and that will be very good for 50~150 yds, which is about what a .30-30 carbine can do for me anyhow.

Use your entire target for the shot, not just the bull.

Consistent shot placement can be achieved by quartering up the target in your reticle, even using the target backboard, stand and all depending on the distance. Our range owner shoots out to 1250yd with consistent first shot hits on target using nothing higher than a 12 power. Granted he's had some formal training, but the point remains. Scopes are hardly ever mechanically true and the greater the magnification, the greater the margin for mechanical error when dialing in adjustments. A high power spotting scope is relatively inexpensive and will serve you well for knowing what adjustments are needed...

 

[CaddmannQ]

Oli, my eyes have been poor since I was a kid. 54 years since Dad gave me the bad news that kids with glasses did not grow up to be USAF jet pilots.

All they have done since is get worse. My right eye is good enough to snipe some but for CQB I'd be useless. Left eye screws up CQ depth perception.

I did, however, eventually learn to fly in a sportplane. My eyes aren't good enough to solo anymore and my partner lost his medical, so the plane is sold off now, and those days are gone. (Flying buddy is an FFL. He flew the sheriff's drug patrol plane & is the same guy I bought my guns through.)

Use your entire target for the shot, not just the bull.

Consistent shot placement can be achieved by quartering up the target in your reticle, even using the target backboard, stand and all . . .

Absolutely! It's the same as aiming at the center of mass on any target.

The bullet goes where you aim it, but you must aim at what you can focus on.

 

[CaddmannQ]

For my birthday next month I'm going to buy myself a really nice target scope for the AR. I'll probably spend close to $1,000 but at least 500. That may sound like a lot to some of you guys and not much to others but typically I pay about 4 or $500 for a pair of eyeglasses and a good rifle scope has a lot more to it.

There's so much too choose from, it's amazing.

It needs to work with the scope mount that I bought but other than that I am open to suggestions.

 

[WNCmotard]

This is exactly the conundrum I've been in picking a new optic for the .300blk pistol. At close ranges, 100yds and less, if I'm shooting steel or silhouettes, I'm a both eyes open shooter so I need a true 1x, 1.1 or anything else just won't work. And here's one BIG bitch I have about most of the 1x variables that are out there, why in the hell would you give me a nice mil or BDC reticle that I can use for DOPE, then used exposed target turrets on a damn 1x scope? I seriously doubt many guys out there are dialing up their 1x variable scopes for range, but hell, I've been wrong plenty of times before and probably am now. The ones that do offer capped turrets, I hate the damn reticle, the ones that have nice reticles usually have exposed turrets, GRRRRRR. The Leupold MK6 1-6x20mm is perfect IMO, but it's also $2800, and that ain't happening.

 

[CaddmannQ]

I could go for that if....well so many ifs. I'll just have to live with my exposed turrets. On the bench. Where I can still shoot with my sore knee.

 

[oli700]

you wont really find a better bang for the buck than Vortex at your price point

 

[WNCmotard]

Vortex PST or SWFA SS are the two main options I've been looking at. Also looked at the Burris, both the MTAC and the TAC 30, but don't care for the reticles.

 

[oli700]

if your not too stuck up this scope will shoot with most of them but it has a better reticle than all of them.....the reticle is based off Primary Arms engineer Dimiti's ACSS . The ACSS was bought by and now is being put in a model of Trijicons ACOG.
http://www.primaryarms.com/primary-...56-reticle/p/kt-pa4-14xffp-acss-hud-dmr-5.56/


what you give up with this scope is low light capability and a life time warrantee. The scope wont detract from it , it just wont add to it. They are not real light gatherers......however the glass is clear as a bell , magnification true, adjustments positive, durability .....

this is a first focal plane scope. Meaning the reticle magnifies when you twist it up. This biggest benefit to the FFP is the zero remains the same at all magnifications. With a second focal scope you are really only dead on at the magnification you zeroed at. So at the same yards your POI will shift with only magnification changes

 

[WNCmotard]

Yeah, in my opinion FFP isn't really needed on these low power scopes honestly. I'm pretty much going to be at 1x or 4x and can't really think of a time I'd use 2x or 3x. I've had other FFP scopes in higher powers and definitely see the usability there, I just don't see it for my needs in a 1x based variable power scope. I have a buddy that has that exact same optic, and I didn't care for the reticle design personally. The dot and horseshoe are too fat and obscure too much at longer range, like the MTAC and others in that vein IMO. And as I'll be hunting with it, light gathering is fairly important too. I know the SWFA gear is Japanese built, rather than China or Korea, and they get great praise for their glass, reliability, and no BS lifetime warranty. You pay more for it, which I'm OK with, and it's where I'm leaning currently. But again, all that is personal opinion and preference and nothing more. In a perfect world Leupold would listen and build their VX-R firedot line in a true 1x rather than 1.25x.

 

[CaddmannQ]

With the 6~9x I really start noticing the need for FFP. At 4x, it's there but not so much it becomes a nuisance. At 9x it seems to.

if your not too stuck up . . .

Thank you Oli. I was being stuck up .

I'm sure digging the reticle on that AP, and the price seems very attractive. It's 30mm, so I'd need to buy a new mount for $50 (but it's 30mm!)

But I've decided that since my AR is not a "name brand custom" gun, but just a garage build, that it didn't necessarily need or deserve a Leupold Gold Ring.