Guns | Bloghorn

NRA Eastern Armed Forces Memorial Match

May 30th, 2010 by foghorn in Awful Shooting Squad, Guns

Apparently, every year there’s a memorial day high-power and CMP match on the west coast. Not wanting to be outdone, MCB Quantico hosted this year the first Armed Forces memorial match. There were about 80 shooters (60 NRA, 20 CMP), and I decided to join in on the fun.

The day started with the Marine Corps lighting off a couple fireworks.

We were all very happy to find out they weren’t competing.

After that, we moseyed down to the 200 yard line to set up for the 200 yard shots, which were 2 sighters + 20 record shots offhand slow fire, then 2 sighters + 20 record shots sitting in 60 seconds rapid fire (with a forced mag change). I didn’t do as well as I thought I would. But notice that in the following pictures I have like a gun, a spotting scope, and some ammo, and everyone else has shooting jackets and fancy equipment. So there might be some consolation in that.

The view from 300 yards (the bipod was removed during shooting):

Some of you may be wondering how exactly the targets are moved around. Well I’ll let you in on a little secret: there are PEOPLE working in the pit! Yes, these pit pullers sit there all day long (for $30/shooter) and pull and score your targets.

Here’s a slow fire target. The white circle is on a spindle placed in the last shot fired so the spotter can see it, and the orange dot indicates the score. The score positions are (clockwise from 9 o’ clock) 5, 6, miss, 7, 8, 9, 10, X.

Here’s a target from one of the rapid fire stages. Instead of scoring each shot, orange golf tees are placed in the holes and the scores are tallied on a chalkboard for the spotter.

Here’s the firing line at the 600 yard shot. The sky cleared up quite a bit and I even got a pretty nasty sunburn out of the experience. I’m in lane 11, 5 shooters from the left:

The guy in the red behind me is an Army officer spotting and scoring me. He shot after me, and we swapped (me spotting and scoring him) when he shot. Cool guy. I broke his ECI though.

600 yards is FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR!

I lost the first 3 heats’ scores, but here’s my 2 strings from 600 yards:

2+20 @ 600 Sighters : 9 10 Record-S1: 5 10 X 7 6 8 7 8 10 7 = 78 1x Record-S2: 10 9 7 7 7 8 10 6 8 7 = 79 = 157 1x

[EDIT]: After an email from the event staff, I now have all my scores:

- 200 yards standing slow fire: 165 1x
- 200 yards seated rapid fire: 170 3x
- 300 yards prone rapid fire: 184 1x
- 600 yards prone slow fire: 157 2x

Total score: 676/800

And with my refund check, I think I’m gunna buy an NRA service rifle. So I can stop feeling like I’m cheating in tactical class.

No Comments

IPSC practice at the NRA range

May 19th, 2010 by foghorn in Awful Shooting Squad, Guns

The NRA range is awesome. And the ROs are pretty cool guys and gals. I really gotta start going more often.

Anyway, every Tuesday is activity day at the range. This Tuesday was the IPSC competition that happens every month. You sign up for a one hour block, show up, and for $20 you get to run 4 courses of fire. here’s how they set it up:

STAGE 1

Start condition is a hot pistol holstered, hands on the orange tape on the side of the wood board. On the buzzer, the shooter draws and engages each paper target with 2 rounds and each steel target until it drops, all without leaving the orange box on the ground. After all targets have been engaged, shooter moves to the stage 2 setup and engages all of those targets.

I started slow and deliberate, but I sped up after the first target. One shot, one kill on the steel, no faults. I did a reload while moving between the two locations, as they had us download all of our mags to 10 rounds for the entire competition. Time: 14 seconds.

STAGE 2:

This was a two string stage. Start condition is a hot pistol placed on the table pointed downrange, hands in the air with elbows locked. On the buzzer, the shooter engages the left popper ONLY and two rounds per paper target. For the second string, the start condition is the same, but the shooter engages the right popper and two rounds per paper with STRONG HAND ONLY.

I sped a little on this stage and put one round in the no shoot. But all other shots were good. I need to work on my strong hand only shooting.

STAGE 3:

Start condition is a hot pistol holstered, hands on the orange Xes. On the buzzer the shooter engages each target ONCE from EACH position: leaning left, through the hole in the middle, and leaning right. Total of 24 rounds, 3 per target.

I reloaded moving between each position, and the speed reloads went smooth and perfect. Instead of retaining the mags I just dumped them and did a full speed reload instead of a tac reload. I missed twice, though.

STAGE 4:

Start condition is an unloaded pistol placed on the table with a magazine beside it, shooter in the chair, hands on the knees. On the buzzer, shooter gets up, loads the pistol, and engages each paper target once and each steel target until they fall.

One thing you may notice is that the poppers are TINY and in front of no-shoots. Because the tiny poppers alone weren’t evil enough, I guess. After engaging all of the paper targets I was out of ammo and the slide locked back, so I smacked a new mag in and was able to slingshot the slide. I only shot the no-shoot behind the poppers once, the guy that was running an open class pistol shot it 4 times on one and once on the other, though. So I think I did comparatively well.

RESULTS

- Overall: 26/33 (28.96% of leader)
- In-class: 11/18 (Production)

Things I learned:
- You can’t see where your shots are going very well when shooting IPSC
- I need to get another mag pouch, using all 3 mags I had on me was disconcerting
- I need to practice a LOT more with pistol

No Comments

On the news… in Russia!

May 14th, 2010 by foghorn in Guns, RKKA

At Odessa this year we had an embedded news crew with the Soviet unit taking video of us for use in a news story on Russia 1, the Russian news station. Wednesday this week they finally published the story. Take a look:

Click here to go to the website with the video

Here’s some pictures Rob took of the weekend. I was trying out a medic impression, and I think I have it just about right.

No Comments

Gun mounted camera

May 13th, 2010 by foghorn in Awful Shooting Squad, Guns, Tech

After watching the Magpul training videos lovingly supplied by our sponsors Dallas Shooting Supplies, I noticed that in a couple of scenes Chris or Travis have a camera mounted on their gun. I thought it looked like a really cool effect, and would be useful for training as well as reviewing our runs in competition. Plus, those who are interested could watch us in action from a new and exciting angle. Check out the trailer, about 27 second in is what I’m talking about:

So after researching the options online, I settled on the GoPro HD Helmet Hero because of the attachments and included waterproof / shockproof case (for when it “rains sideways” again). One of the included attachments was PERFECT for what i wanted to use it for, so i strapped it on and headed for the range.

Cool, huh? I haven’t decided on whether I should mount it facing forwards or rearwards yet. But either way, I need to get better at editing video…

No Comments

Testing out the accuracy of Wolf ammo

May 2nd, 2010 by foghorn in Guns

A few weeks back, I tried to do a scientific comparison of Wolf and Prvi 62gr factory ammunition to see which was better through a 1:7 twist AR-15 rifle.We did a blind test, with me firing six rounds of each at a target and comparing them. As it turns out, the Wolf was just about as accurate as the Prvi Partizan ammo, which cost almost twice as much.

Wolf vs. Prvi

The difference in the variance between the groups made by Wolf 62gr and Prvi 62gr was not statistically significant. This sparked some debate about the fitness of wolf 55gr ammo, with the thought that it was worse than the 62gr offerings. Being smart-asses, we took it upon ourselves to find out if this was true.So we went to the range today to test the hypothesis that Wolf sucks.
Let’s talk a little science before we get to the results. Our hypothesis was that Wolf 55gr ammunition shot through a 1:9 barrel would group worse than 62gr Wolf shot through a 1:9 barrel. Our research showed that 62gr would stabilize adequately in a 1:9 barrel, as would 55gr, so twist rate was not an issue in this test. We set up an IPSC target at 50 yards with 5 black dots drawn on it. We had previously attempted to zero the rifle using Wolf 55gr ammo, but as we’ll see the rifle was still slightly off (but predictably and consistently, and so not a factor in the final conclusion).

The target, before firing

Using my new 16″ DPMS upper, I fired three rounds of ammo at each dot, Nate loading the rifle out of my sight and handing me a hot weapon, eliminating my ability to tell which ammo I was shooting.Nate also kept track of which ammo was fired at which dot. Following one complete round (3 shots at each dot) he then randomized the ammo sequence, telling me which dot to fire at each time (to keep the same ammo fired at the same dot from the first round). I fired each round carefully, taking aim each time, however I am by no means an expert marksman so take these results with that in mind (although I do shoot 1 inch groups at 100 now with my Noveske upper).

The test rifle

We decided not to just test Wolf vs. Wolf, but a number of other ammunition types as well. Unfortunately, we were unable to secure any more 62gr Wolf, but as we saw from the last test, the difference in ballistic properties between Wolf and Prvi was not statistically significant, so we used some Prvi ammo instead as a control. Ammo used in this test:

Prvi Partizan 62gr .223 ($11/20)
PMC Bronze 55gr .223 ($8/20)
Wolf 55gr .223 ($5/20)
Tula 55gr .223 ($5/20)
Remington 55gr SP .223 ($12/20)

After the full course of fire, the results were extremely surprising.

The target (ammo names added after the test was complete)

Showing the ammo types next to the results

According to these results, Wolf is actually the most consistent ammunition we tried in 55gr.

Conclusion: Buy Wolf, it’s cheaper AND BETTER!

I know, we were as amazed as you are. I encourage someone to repeat my experiment to confirm / repute my results.

DATA!
All values are measured as the distance between the point of aim (the center of the big black box) to the outermost corner of the hole in the cardboard. Only the X-axis was considered in these measurements, because taking into account the Y-axis was just too much work for a Saturday night.

Wolf    Tula    PMC       Rem    Prvi
2.323    2.749    1.243    3.017    2.819
2.564    1.362    1.846    4.150    3.7
3.146    1.492    2.193    3.464    3.057
3.112    2.093    2.431    2.797    5.233
3.038    3.401    2.720    2.299    3.192
3.000    2.871    3.040    3.295    3.846

2.863    2.328    2.245    3.170    3.641    Average

0.114    0.662    0.411    0.396    0.759    Variance

Some of you may remember [url="http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3076184&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=201#post374752776"]my last ammo comparison between Wolf and Prvi[/url].
[quote="foghorn"]
:siren: [b]NEW RESULTS ON THE PRVI AMMO[/b] :siren:

So I went to the range to do a side-by-side comparison of Prvi Partizan 62gr .223 Rem ammo and it’s Wolf counterpart.

As we saw in my last post, based on my observations, Prvi was patterning worse than Wolf usually does. But that’s not a fair test. Here’s both, side by side. Left is Wolf, right is Prvi:

[url="http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-04-02/DSC00334.JPG"][img]http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-04-02/resize/DSC00334.jpg[/img][/url]

But that wasn’t a blind test, I knew which ammo I was shooting. So my friend MazeOfTzeentch loaded 4 mags and handed them to me, blind. Just so happened that left was Wolf again and Right was Prvi.

[url="http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-04-02/DSC00335.JPG"][img]http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-04-02/resize/DSC00335.jpg[/img][/url]

As we can see from the blind test. Wolf and Prvi appear to be pretty similar. Both targets were at 50 yards through my pretty princess AR.

Conclusion: Buy Wolf, it’s cheaper.
[/quote]

The difference in the variance between the groups made by Wolf 62gr and Prvi 62gr was not statistically significant. This sparked some debate about the fitness of wolf 55gr ammo, with the thought that it was worse than the 62gr offerings. Being smart-asses, we took it upon ourselves to find out if this was true. So, without further adieu, I give you…

:siren: [b]WOLF AMMO TESTS PART II[/b] :siren:

Let’s talk a little :science: before we get to the results. Our hypothesis was that Wolf 55gr ammunition shot through a 1:9 barrel would group worse than 62gr Wolf shot through a 1:9 barrel. Our research showed that 62gr would stabilize adequately in a 1:9 barrel, as would 55gr, so twist rate was not an issue in this test. We set up an IPSC target at 50 yards with 5 black dots drawn on it. We had previously attempted to zero the rifle using Wolf 55gr ammo, but as we’ll see the rifle was still slightly off (but predictably and consistently, and so not a factor in the final conclusion).

[url="http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-05-01/DSC00398.JPG"][img]http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-05-01/resize/DSC00398r.jpg[/img][/url]

Using my new 16″ DPMS upper, I fired three rounds of ammo at each dot, MazeOfTzeentch loading the rifle out of my sight and handing me a hot weapon, eliminating my ability to tell which ammo I was shooting. mazeOfTzeentch also kept track of which ammo was fired at which dot. Following one complete round (3 shots at each dot) he then randomized the ammo sequence, telling me which dot to fire at each time (to keep the same ammo fired at the same dot from the first round). I fired each round carefully, taking aim each time, however I am by no means an expert marksman so take these results with that in mind (although I do shoot 1 inch groups at 100 now with my Noveske upper).

[url="http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-05-01/DSC00403.JPG"][img]http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-05-01/resize/DSC00403r.jpg[/img][/url]

[url="http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-05-01/DSC00410.JPG"][img]http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-05-01/resize/DSC00410r.jpg[/img][/url]

We decided not to just test Wolf vs. Wolf, but a number of other ammunition types as well. Unfortunately, we were unable to secure any more 62gr Wolf, but as we saw from the last test, the difference in ballistic properties between Wolf and Prvi was not statistically significant, so we used some Prvi ammo instead as a control. Ammo used in this test:[list][*]Prvi Partizan 62gr .223 ($11/20)
[*]PMC Bronze 55gr .223 ($8/20)
[*]Wolf 55gr .223 ($5/20)
[*]Tula 55gr .223 ($5/20)
[*]Remington 55gr SP .223 ($12/20)[/list]
After the full course of fire, the results were extremely surprising.

[url="http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-05-01/DSC00405.JPG"][img]http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-05-01/resize/DSC00405r.jpg[/img][/url]

[url="http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-05-01/DSC00417.JPG"][img]http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-05-01/resize/DSC00417r.jpg[/img][/url]

According to these results, Wolf is actually the most consistent ammunition we tried in 55gr. PMC Bronze was a close second, with one flier loaded slightly hotter than the rest. The remaining ammo was beyond the standard (variance*2) test and therefore statistically less accurate.

[b]Conclusion: Buy Wolf, it’s cheaper AND BETTER![/b]

I know, we were as amazed as you are. I encourage someone to repeat my experiment to confirm / repute my results.

And with that, I leave you with a picture of a hot chick firing an AK.

[url="http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-05-01/DSC00401.JPG"][img]http://frostedbutts.com/images/10-05-01/resize/DSC00401r.jpg[/img][/url]

:science: [b]DATA![/b] :science:
All values are measured as the distance between the point of aim (the center of the big black box) to the outermost corner of the hole in the cardboard. Only the X-axis was considered in these measurements, because taking into account the Y-axis was just too much work for a Saturday night.[pre]Wolf   Tula   PMC   Rem   Prvi
2.323   2.749   1.243   3.017   2.819
2.564   1.362   1.846   4.15   3.7
3.146   1.492   2.193   3.464   3.057
3.112   2.093   2.431   2.797   5.233
3.038   3.401   2.72   2.299   3.192
3   2.871   3.04   3.295   3.846

2.863 2.328 2.245 3.170 3.641 Average

0.114 0.662 0.411 0.396 0.759 Variance
[/pre]Some of you may remember [url="http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3076184&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=201#post374752776"]my last ammo comparison between Wolf and Prvi[/url].
[quote="foghorn"]
:siren: [b]NEW RESULTS ON THE PRVI AMMO[/b] :siren: