Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Backstage' started by JMV, May 28, 2010.
Good to have!!
BTW guys, I finally own a 10/22.
Always wanted one, but never found one for the price I was willing to pay. I got this one for $125 (That, I can live with!).
Guy said he couldnt hit a squirrel with it.
Fiber optic sights are dead on. Guy musta had too much coffee.
50th anniversary stamp on the receiver.
Everyone should own one or seven!
I like the simple little carbines, American classics.
To be fair to Tex in the first video, he WAS using the most unsafe holster known to mankind.
Seriously, safety pin a sock inside your pants before you use one of those things.
The retention paddle is placed in such a way that depressing it and pulling the gun pretty well centers your booger hook right over the trigger.
Good deal. Those stocks are all but bomb proof.I like the quad too. You ever go rouge bandito, call me, I'll bring my gun and machine too for maneuvers.
That could be true, but he don't look like a proficient pistolarro. To me. People need to be careful.
I never had any issue with a Serpa (carried multiple versions in Iraq and Afghanistan and sometimes carry a Glock in one now, even though I prefer leather). You keep your finger straight and flat when you engage the lever. No curve on your finger, no pressure other than resting the flat of your finger on the lever. Press it like a button with a curved finger and you're gonna shoot yourself. Don't do that.
Bloody government took mine off me! Best gun I've ever owned!
All right! Congratulations, Dave!
I'd love to have a 20" barrel myself-- but you know how it is: budget, budget, budget. Fixed income is one of the vexations of retirement... though the truth is I could always get some piddling job for a bit of extra coin, but am simply too damned lazy...
Back to the new barrel, though: I can see this as being advantageous for the sort of shots you're likely to have available in the Mojave Desert. Lots of longer-distance shooting out there even with all the hills and such, I'm sure.
Very nice price, too!
Edro has a heavy-barrel match-type 20" barrel, I do believe. If this one doesn't end up satisfying you, he might be able to tell you something useful about his experience with that sort of thing. Not sure what he's up to these days, but he used to do a lot of service match shooting with that rifle of his.
As is often the case with me: I'm kinda brainless here...
I own a Filipino-made Rock Island Armory .45 compact model:
Very nice pistol, especially for the price. If one discards its sawed-off nature, the extended beavertail, and the skeletonized hammer, this thing is essentially a MILSPEC-ish sort of creation, made with love on Colt machines by the world's finest Filipinos in the City of Marikina, Philippines.
It has been a very good gun, though I don't really shoot it often. One thing about it that kinda sucks (but not badly) is that due to the distinctly early design of its feed ramp, this one doesn't readily digest hollow point ammo or anything other than RNFMJ, military-type ball ammunition. But then: near as I can tell, 230-grain military ball ammo is generally pretty damned effective anyway. The "problem" is a very easy one to live with.
While Dave was here, he was telling me that Filipinos seem to have a love affair with the venerable M1911A1. For sure, the RIA specimen I own really is a very good .45 automatic. If you stick to the military-type ammunition, it never malfs. Dave really liked the trigger, too.
Like any other MILSPECKy .45, this one has the usual stake-on type of sights.
One day while at the range, my smart-aleck daughter was on hand as I admired another guy's .45. It was some species of Wilson, IIRC, and he had some nifty sights as part of the package. I fired a few rounds with his handgun, slapped him on the back while thanking him, and then he was gone.
But my sarcastic daughter was still there, so I began to talk about my own .45. It's most definitely sufficient for the purposes I had in mind when I first bought it, but then again I really do not shoot it often. Hell, I don't even hand load for it, though that might be about to change. I just checked and found that I now have about 300 once-fired cases, and am thinking maybe I should shoot the .45 more often...
But while on the range that day, I started telling the daughter that maybe I should upgrade the sights on the thing. What's there is pretty basic-- but then: so am I when it comes to lots of things related to firearms. I wondered aloud if I could justify the cost to myself.
She laughed and told me not to bother with upgrading the sights. When I asked her why, she said, "Because in all the years I've been shooting with you, I've only seen you bring that .45 maybe a half dozen times. And when you do, I never noticed you using the sights to begin with!"
Mouthy brat! I don't even know why I bring her to the range with me. She's almost always a nuisance of one sort or another.
But damned if she ain't right better than half the time...
I want to show you guys a real cool piece of gear I am surprised hasn't come up yet.
If you're an AR owner, you should give some real consideration to buying one of these:
This is a conversion unit to replace your standard BCG and turn your standard 223/5.56 AR into a .22LR
It is a blowback operated design with the end shaped and sized like a .233 cartridge. The rimfire seats back here:
And when fired the bullet jumps through the length until it hits rifling. It isn't super accurate, but enough for plinking, training and emergancy food getting if need be.
These can usually be had from PSA or brownells for about $100 or so.
This was all news to me!
I bookmarked that site right away-- lots of good stuff, right there.
While attempting to shoot accurately over distances, all I ever really did was observe what the wind looked like down on the target line, and then sort of guesstimated how much "Kentucky windage" to dial into my hold. Come to think of, that's generally also how I did things when it came to elevation...
And of course: sometimes I hit, and sometimes I missed... and that's whether I was using a scoped rifle or iron sights...
So this information is of great interest to me, especially because of the timing of it. Here, we have something I can actually mess with-- and right as I was about to start messing with it anyway.
As you know, I've got that Ruger Model 77 Mk. II in .270 Win that's soon to be Mag-na-ported. It's a kind of "project rifle" that I've now taken particular mind to fiddle with.
So far as accuracy is concerned, the rifle is "accurate enough" for those purposes for which it was essentially designed: as a hunting rifle. With me shooting it, it was good for about 1.5 MOA with the right ammo... and maybe 2+ MOA with loadings that it didn't care for.
Which is plenty good enough to hit a deer in that 6" vital area out to about 300 yards. It was also consistent in producing groups as indicated above at those ranges as well. But it was finicky about how its ammo was set up... very sensitive towards specific seating depth with a given projectile.
That's why I bought this Redding seating die some time back. I could dial things in to perfection using it:
However, this rifle wouldn't be the first thing grabbed by some accomplished sharpshooter for any sort of truly serious business by any means. Still, I'm thinking I can get it to do better anyway.
Our rifle range offers a 1200-yard course of fire. Lately, I've gotten to thinking about how I've not taken advantage of that, and also about messing with this rifle so as to accomplish two purposes:
1. To further accurize the rifle to a greater degree, by modifying a few things and continuing to develop loads for it. Might even glass bed it-- but maybe not.
2. To tame the recoil slightly.
This rifle is a bit light for caliber, and so it's no longer such fun to shoot 50-100 rounds out of it in a day on the range. I'm getting older now, and while the .270 Winchester in this particular specimen of a rifle is certainly milder than what I recall while firing a sporterized O3-A3 I once owned, it's still getting to be a bit much.
So the first thing I'm gonna do is Mag-na-port the rifle. This should give me up to about a 15% decrease in felt recoil, and an improved recoil pad will eat up another 5-10% or so. That would put the thing on a par with, say, a .30-30 Winchester... which is something I can shoot all day.
I'm also still interested in developing lighter loadings, chiefly using H4895 powder (which will allow me to reduce propellant charges by up to 60% without fear of powder detonation), though I have the sneaking suspicion that accuracy with anything that doesn't send a 130-grain bullet out the snout at about 2900 fps will probably be somewhat sub-par. And for sure, it will become even less accurate than ever at longer ranges.
Meanwhile, I have other plans for this beast. Depending on how well it shoots after the Mag-na-port job, anyway.
I know that Jack O'Connor-- the guy who more or less put the cartridge on the map to begin with-- certainly didn't load light. His famous loading involved a 130-grain bullet on top of a 62-grain compressed charge of H4831 propellant. That particular loading would seem a little over-the-top these days, though... Hodgdon itself lists a compressed 60-grain charge as maximum on its website.
But then, too, Jack didn't have access to such a wide variety of bullet designs as we do in these blessed latter days. Back when he was really active, all that seemed to be out there were 130 and 150 grain soft point bullets that all featured the same tangent ogive and basic construction. Now, there's all kinds of crazy stuff out there-- from 90-grain stingers that come out the snout at about 3,600 fps to 180-grain lumpers that poke along at a mere 2,500 fps or so... but which feature lots of penetration and knockdown power.
At this point in time, I load four different types of .277" bullets for 270 Winchester:
1. 100-grain Hornady JSP. Using a full charge of H4895, I can get them out there at about 3,400 fps.
2. 130-grain Speer Hot-Cor. Good for about 3000 fps with a hefty charge of H4831 SC.
3. 130-grain generic JSP. Same performance as the 130-grain Speer, but with a different ogive that presents a superior ballistic coefficient when compared to the Speer bullets.
4. 130-grain generic JHP. Same velocities, secant ogive instead of tangent. No idea what to expect out of it other than general velocity.
Those two I've labeled as "generic" are part of a mass of bullets I got for Real Cheap at an estate sale. I paid 20 bucks for 300 JHP's and about 120 JSP's... just a fraction of what they would cost if I bought them from somebody like Bass Pro.
Notice that freaky hollow point, though. It looks almost as if it has two cannelures, which doesn't make sense. But if you look at the top "cannelure", it seems as though it is sculpted somewhat differently than the actual crimping cannelure. I am beginning to think that maybe this was some feature tried out by some bullet company to increase accuracy or something.
I mean, I never saw any other bullet with two cannelures...
But anyway, that's what I'm going to be really getting into, now that the hot season is lapsing into the very pleasant Florida version of "winter". I'll be able to hang out without sweating bullets while also shooting them, and I do mean to see what I can get out of this rifle after mounting a better optic than the old Nikon scope I had on it before...
I don't reckon that 1200 yards is a realistic distance for me to be messing with, or that this particular cartridge is a good choice for that type of shooting. But I know that O'Connor sometimes took game clear about to about 650 yards using .270 Winchester, and I think it will be fun to see what I can do with the thing at about 500 yards or so.
How deep is the hollow? That top "cannelure" looks to me like it's designed as a "hinge point."
The portion above petals out to increase wound diameter while the portion below stays intact for penetration.
Take a Dremel to that ramp rob, geez..5 minutes worth if work, that thing will digest hollow points.
Looks like a typical Commander to me with a good beavertail. Piss on that hammer bite.
Well, I do believe that you just nailed it!
I measured the cavity depth. Came out to .365"... meanwhile, the striated portion of the bullet that had me confused goes to about .320" from the tip of the bullet.
You know, I was gonna pretend that I knew that all along, and was just testin' ya... but I think by now you'd realize that no way did I know what the story was with those bullets!
Well done! And for that you win... well, nothing really.
I mean, I'm all grateful and stuff-- but a cash prize is distinctly out of the question. Maybe I'll make up some meaningless award certificate or something, but only if you insist (if then).
Still and all: thanks! That's one more thing that will no longer keep me lying awake in bed all night...
Sometimes I get lucky. I was SWAGing it.
If you're really in a generous mood I'll be happy to accept an IOU certificate redeemable for some of your gumbo. Mind that it'll be a few years before I make it to central Florida again.
Funny, I was just about to post about the .270 being a perfect sniper rifle. That thing Shoot a flatter that than Twiggy' s t*ts.
It would be an excellent choice for a civilian sniper weapon. Under rated for certain applications.
The military thing is good, but we're cillivan shooters with civilian shooting needs and issues. Don't underestimate the .270 with a 150gr. JSP bullet @ 2788fps, It shoots as flat as any thirty caliber with 150gr. JSP bullet at 2900fps. My choice would be a 140gr. JBTSP bullet @ 2850fps.
No dont forget it buddy, glass bed the Reciever and free float the barrel. Now your starting to make substantial improvements.
Let that barrel wiggle!
The Winchester Short Magnum
(270 WSM)out performs it with a more compact package for long range With a case length of a mere 2.100" and an OAL: of 2.860" with the same 140gr. JBTSP bullet With a whopping max of 3131fps. Loaded up to around 3000fps would make a great long range shooter.
Regular pam cooking spray makes great mold realse. I ued it all the time.
Are you a lefty like me..??
For sure you'd be welcome to it, if and when you do show up here in lovely Deland.
I'm actually making a couple of gallons of the stuff come Thursday and Friday! Got a debt to a neighbor that can be paid in gumbo, and I'm looking forward to making the First Gumbo of Autumn anyway... I also recall that I still haven't come across with an herbal liniment recipe you wished to obtain. So you've got that coming, too.
Betty made good Mississippi Gumbo.
Yes sir-- I'm a lefty!
And yes: the cartridge is capable of very good accuracy-- better than average in some instances. Flatter than a .30-06 in some of the more critical loads, though you can't go up to 220-grain bullets with the .270, the way you can with a .30-06.
But with 130's? It's easier to reach out farther with a .270 Win than a .30-06, all other things being equal. Or so sayeth St. Jack of O'Connor...
I read an article on the Internet just a while ago, in which it was puzzled out why the .270 Win was never a big favorite among the high-power benchrest guys, despite the inherent accuracy of the cartridge itself. Maybe somebody would like to read it:
Bottom line seems to have been lack of factory support (especially when it came to bullets) and a greater public interest in shooting high-power with modified service rifles. In some areas, like where I grew up, the .270 Winchester seemed a bit odd-- almost suspicious-- to the multitude of deer hunters in Upstate New York. Those guys all mainly seemed to use things like .30-30, .30-06, .300 Savage, and .444 Marlin. They were all about brush-busting with heavier bullets, and lots of them favored shotgun slugs as well.
The long-range, flat-shooting thing seemed to be more interesting to guys who hunted in the wide-open places out west. Guess it figures.
I marked the thing with Pam being a good mold release a while back-- it's in the Frogfur Files...
I have talked to a few people-- and read one thousand articles written by guys I don't know-- about glass bedding and free floating that barrel.
My first information (Internet guys, and maybe Wizard was one of them) had it that this Ruger rifle doesn't like a free-floated barrel. Somebody said that Ruger itself has said so, and that the barreled action was designed to have a bit of pressure on the fore end of the stock... but I haven't actually found Ruger saying this anywhere. I can't help but to wonder if this it might not be just more Internet baloney. Lord knows there ain't no shortage of that particular type of mystery meat.
Meanwhile, somebody I do know said that glass bedding and free floating is just the thing... and that it made a huge difference in a Ruger 77 he once owned that was chambered for .25-06. He also said that free floating was almost essential for guns in Florida on account of the humidity. And of course, the glass bedding helped as well.
He added that glass bedding a Ruger 77 is best done while using these pillar beds. He said that he wouldn't consider doing a Ruger without them:
But of course, any information you may care to pass along concerning this topic will be much appreciated. Just like in the case of Dan figuring out what that funky bullet was all about you have won... well, nothing, really.
Of course, you'll have my eternal gratitude (while my memory lasts), and also at least one big bowl of gumbo if you ever find yourself in swampy-ass Central Florida.