Minute of critter/ deer thats a great definition of the minimum needed to get the job done at any one time.
Printable View
Minute of critter/ deer thats a great definition of the minimum needed to get the job done at any one time.
Minute of critter/ deer thats a great definition of the minimum needed to get the job done at any one time.
As mentioned the old Bren was accurate.
When I first joined most of the Brens were converted to 7.62
There were still some in. 303
I remember one of our bigger fellas who was a gunner that could single shot the thing into tiny wee groups and instead of shooting at the target at 300 he would shoot the pole in order to piss off the fellas in the butts.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
yip you sure wouldnt want to try to match that with an AK47,uzi or a steyr ....and they call it progress
the bren would have been fitted with iron sights was it not???????
my Father still has a trophy in cabinet from his compulersy military service days
Dad and his mate cleaned up the whole battalion between them, his mate was first with the bren and 2nd with rifle and Dad the other way around.....
I had a Longbranch No.4 that would do the same. These days I have a 30/30 Winchester carbine with standard factory sights that will go under that with ease, as well as a Winchester 73 in .44/40 that will shoot 1.5 inch groups with black powder and open sights. The '73 took a lot of experimentation with both the loads and the sights to get there; the .30/30 was born that way.
Yeah it was just off set irons.
But the same fella was a freak and Army shooting team gunner. When we were training for comps I seen him hit a fig 14 (huns head) 6 out of 10rnds with a gpmg at 500yrds.
Couldn't shoot a rifle for shit tho [emoji6]
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
@Micky Duck
All spitzers tumble - because their point of balance is towards their base. The Mk 7 ball merely had exaggerated rearward point of balance. A rearward point of balance also renders spitzers (translated "pointys") more accurate.
With regard to accuracy, more accurate cartridges, etc, that is a long discussion.
Military rifles are designed for reliability-- with dirt included. That includes loose chamber tolerances, whether .303 or 7.62x39. Hard to feed cartridges perfectly concentric with the bore when you have a loose-fit chamber, and as such bullets engage rifling off-axis, a major, major, major source of inaccuracy. A .303 No 4 could have been made with exacting tolerances to shoot half-MOA (with a new barrel) but look in all respects like a stock rifle, but you'd not trust your life to it. And you would experience problems with out-of-spec ammo.
I had a Remington 03-A3 sporter that was an absolute tack driver even with open sights, heavy as the day is long though!
I asked a gunsmith to tap the action for me so I could fit a scope and he refused, reckons they were made from some of the hardest steel out and smiths hate tapping them as it wrecks their gear. Real nice rifle it was.
Still down to rifle and shooter.
Attachment 75639
These two thought they where safe out at over 100meters not:XD:
Rifle was this! CZ :thumbsup:
Attachment 75641
When my brother saw the shots he brought it on the spot:D
You just need to know your cartridge and know your rifle.
Every rifle is different.......our should I say every barrel once the bedding and trigger is taken care of;)
Looks like that top photo was taken from where the shot was:XD:
Attachment 75646
Here's a closer look:)
http://www.nzhuntingandshooting.co.n...tml#post633782
Apparently much .22 Mag ammo has shite quality projectiles that will never allow top performance.
Regarding the maggies, I'd be more excited if you'd said they were levelled at 150yds. I shot two this morning with a PCP air rifle at 85 and 87yds resp
Actually taken at 175. Which is around 160 meters:)http://www.nzhuntingandshooting.co.n...tml#post633782
Cant say I have seen too many 9mm or 45acp carbines that were super accurate although I guess it goes back to the ammo.
Someone will contradict me :thumbsup:
@veitnamcam,
The 30/06, despite of any long-powder-column disadvantage if such exists, will have one advantage from its long case length: A LONGER cartridge will more readily line up with the bore axis, which in turn helps its bullet engage with the rifling on-axis.
A bullet which is perfectly balanced on the rifling axis is less like a corkscrewing aerobat before its spin eventually stabilises it at some point of its corkscrew. This is why some large groups often describe circles (with the centre less densely holed, rather than a uniform peppering of holes covering the entire area of a circle).
@300CALMAN,
From memory, the Sterling L2A3 9mm SMG (WW2 Patchett SMG derivative) fired from an open bolt. And it was required to be able to hit within a 10 cm circle at 200 metres, obviously in semi-auto mode. That is <2 MOA. This is not super accuracy, but it is superlative accuracy in a 9mm SMG. About as much as anyone should ever hope to get out of the 9x19mm. Someone please correct me.
cant really say ive come across an inaccurate cartridge come across a few inaccurate rifles tho some could be fixed some couldn't ive come across fussy cartridges that in factory loads were crap but a little experimenting with hand loads sorted them 22 hornet springs to mind
@vietnamcam
Apples for apples, I was thinking of long vs short cartridges, both in military loose chambers. With the exact same tolerances employed, the longer cartridge will of course be more likely to sit on-axis. But how big that effect is for accuracy... who knows.
To help cartridges sit concentric with the rifling bore, some advocate putting a thin O-ring round the base of the cartridge, a couple mm ahead of the rim on rimmed cartridges or extractor groove on non-rimmed cartridges, to help keep the case body centered in the chamber. Helps ensure the bullet engages concentric with the bore. Of course this is also nifty if you reuse cases and that first shot fireforms the brass for your chamber, and only neck sizing from then on. To be completely obsessive, you'd also mark 12 o'clock on the rear face of the cartridge, in case the chamber is assymmetric, and from then always chamber it 12 o'clock up.
Interesting, I thought it was a square foot at 100 yards, I have heard some comments to the effect that some 9mm pistols were considered quite accurate. Like the Luger, unfortunately it was apparently made with tight tolerances and struggled with eastern front conditions.
@300CALMAN, you are correct of course. Wikipedia states the requirement as "...sufficiently accurate to allow five consecutive shots (fired in semi-automatic mode) to be placed inside a one-foot-square target at a distance of 100 yd (91 m)." Still impressive for an open-bolt firer. Wonder how good an MP5 would do?
The K and baby Ks I played with were very accurate. Especially the SD versions.
The fellas that carried them for their role were scary fast and accurate with them.
Roller locking and fluted chambers iirc.
The L2 sterling smg was a pig of a thing.
I prefered the Aussie version of smg.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Via the G3, you really see the Sturmgewehr-44 / StGw-44 resemblance there, especially with the older, wooden stocked G3.
StGw-44:
Attachment 75799
CEAM Modele 1950 (french manufactured gun, derived from StGw44, by emigrated German designer:
Attachment 75800
And the H&K G3:
Attachment 75801
The G3, sex on a stick!
@Mathias,
Do you recall what sort of accuracy did you get out of the MP3 on semi-auto?
Hi Cordite, no I don't recall actually putting many through in semi. I was more interested in 3 shot burst & full auto and I was at an indoor range in Charlotte North Carolina.
This image is of one of my targets set at 20 yards, mostly on auto.
Attachment 75821
With pleasure.
The Sterling Patchett Mk5 Silenced SMG (L34A1) was, according to Sterling, even more accurate than the standard Mk4.
The silenced Mk5s had to group a maximum of 2.5 x 2.5 inches at 100 feet and 7.5 x 7.5 inches at 100 yards. With standard ammo.
I really doubt that the standard Mk4 guns would have to group about half that at 200 metres.
Source: The Guns of Dagenham. Lanchester-Patchett-Sterling. By Peter Laidler and David Howroyd. Page 187.
No cartridge is inaccurate rifles are
Ie 7.62x39 sks's are pretty inaccurate but other bolt action rifles can be very accurate
The problem with the .22RF is the design has not changed much since 1852 the case has got longer but the basic design has kept the heeled bullet which
is why it will never be capable of top accuracy no matter how accurate the rifle it is handicapped by the ammo,
the .22 RF Magnum should have fixed the problem but for some reason it hasn't, I have shot the .22mag bullets in a .22 Hornet and a .222 Rem both
shoot it better than the .22mag so it is not the bullet
@shooternz, Well, that does not strictly speaking follow. Your .22mag bullet was shot through a different set of barrels than its native .22mag barrel.
Maybe someone should start shooting paper patched .22mag reloads. Let me see, first reloading item required would be a pair of +3.5 dioptre reading glasses from The Warehouse.
@systolic, Cheers.