Bunch-o-links

Few interesting links I’ve come across lately:

• Video about the Lake City Ammunition Plant
• Exploding blog. The name kinda says it all.
• DoJ Firearm Examiner Training. A great site with lots of information on the history and manufacturing of firearms, ammunition, ammunition components, etc. It’s pretty detailed and informative, but concise enough to be read quickly.

Make your own primers! (sorta)

If you reload, I’m sure you’ve noticed that primers are practically impossible to get these days, unless you’re willing to pay 2-3x retail price. Anyway, as a “last resort” it’s apparently possible to make your own primers! I wouldn’t expect much reliability/consistency (or safety) out of them, but I thought it was cool anways.

(via CalGuns.net)

Gun Porn

my collection

I’m going to be out of town for the summer, so I had to put my gun safe and guns into storage. Before I put each of my rifles into Zerust bags, I lined ‘em up and took a picture, since I rarely pull them all out of the safe at once.

From top to bottom: Kimber 82 Gov’t (22LR), AR-15 (.223), Swedish Mauser (6.5×55), M1A (.308), M1 Garand (30-06), Remington 700 VTR (.223), Marlin 39A (.22), sporterized 1917 Enfield (30-06).

Right handed, Left handed, Wrong handed?

I’ve heard it said that if you want to be a good shooter, you have to shoot using your dominant eye. For years, I’ve ignored this piece of advice, and have been shooting right handed even though I am left-eye dominant (and also left-handed). I am now trying to decide if I should switch to shooting with the right side, by which I mean the left side.

I’ve been shooting right handedly for a number of reasons, but comfort and convenience are the two main ones. I simply feel more comfortable shooting right handedly, and I think this habit was developed when I first started shooting rifles in our basement, using an air rifle my dad had built me. Being left handed, I’m sure my dad gave me the option of shooting lefty, and I probably tried it, but it never stuck. Shooting right handedly is also convenient because most rifles are designed for righties, and I don’t have to get anything special. Sure, the AR (which I shoot most of these days) is ambidextrous, but the mag release is hard to get to, especially when all slung up, under time pressure, and with a CA-legal bullet button (where you have to guide a pointy tool into a small hole). Shooting right-handed bolt rifles lefty is outright awkward.

My club Service Rifle match scores, in percentage of total possible

As far as I can tell, my shooting isn’t limited by my eyesight yet. My left eye is considerably better than my right, but with glasses, the difference is diminished. There’s also the thing about being able to keep both eyes open if you shoot out of your dominant eye, but in competitions, you can put a blind over the other eye and with a little practice, you can train to “see” out your non-dominant eye too. And practically speaking, my scores haven’t plateaued yet, I don’t think. In my club matches, I’ve been shooting around 89-91%, which, has plenty of room for improvement, but is also markedly higher than the 42% I shot in my first match 2 years ago. In my last club match, I shot a 188 in slow prone, with 13 of the 20 shots in the 10 ring. I feel like if my eyes let me put 13 of 20 shots in the 10 ring, it’s good enough to get the remaining 7 shots in the 10 ring too. On the 600 yard line at the State championships, I shot a 172-6x, and I feel like my inability to read wind correctly was a bigger issue than my eye sight. On top of all that, I’ve been shooting in a flimsy cotton shirt, and I’m quite certain that using a good shooting jacket will improve my scores considerably, perhaps enough to get me into the Master range (94%+).

It all might come down to how hard I’m willing to work, and how far I want to go. Maybe I can make Master shooting right handedly, with a good jacket and ample practice. Can I make High Master? Can I become a nationally ranked shooter? Maybe, but I don’t know. To some degree, this is a race against time. I’m not old, but I’m 29; past my physical peak. Every year that I wait to find out whether I should switch, is a year in which my learning ability atrophies, a year in which my eye sight worsens, a year less I spend shooting using the correct hand. On the other hand, I’m very weary of starting from scratch when I’ve come so far. I’m not sure I have the patience, the perseverance, and the time to get as good shooting left handedly as I do right handedly. Right now, I’m thinking of compromising and continuing to shoot Service Rifle right handedly, but spend some time shooting lefty using my .22 Kimber 82 match rifle. Hopefully, that way, if I hit a wall shooting right handedly in a few years, I would’ve laid enough ground work that I won’t have to start completely from scratch shooting lefty.

Real-world test of iPhone ballistics apps

I’m in Coalinga, CA for the California State Service Rifle Championships. I have no ambitions (or chance) of winning anything, but having only shot on 200 yard ranges, I wanted to try shooting at a full 600 yard range. Normally, I shoot 69 grain bullets, but for this occasion, I loaded up some 77 grain bullets. I settled on 77 grain bullets because, unlike 80 grain bullets, I can still load them to 2.260″ COAL and shoot them out of magazines (necessary for the rapid fire strings), but they have ballistic coefficients high enough to not completely suck at 600 yards. Most good High Power/Service Rifle shooters shoot 69-77gr for 200-300 yards, and 80 grains for the 600 yard line, but I decided having one cartridge would be logistically simpler. Anyway, I spent some time this past week developing loads, and my final recipe (24gr of TAC and CCI 450s in LC primers) seemed to push those bullets at around 2740fps.

To help me calculate my come-ups and wind drift for the 300 and 600 yard line, I bought two ballistic apps for my iPhone: Ballistic and iSnipe. Which did I like better? Neither. They were both wrong. I punched in the BC for my bullet (or in the case of Ballistic, selected my bullet from a list), muzzle velocity, that I had a 200yd zero, my altitude, temperature, approximate humidity (dry), and everything else I can think of. Both apps gave me the same numbers: 3 MOA up for 300yds, 15 MOA up for 600 yds. I shot a team match today, and actually got to find out what my come-ups were. They were 2 MOA and 11 MOA for 300 and 600 yards respectively.

So how did the algorithm fail? I don’t know. Maybe Nosler’s advertised BC for the bullets is incorrect. Maybe my muzzle velocity was incorrect, although assuming everything else is correct, my bullets would have had to start at 3150fps to get those come-ups. Maybe I am somehow aiming higher at the 300 and 600 yard lines than I do at 200, although seeing how the aiming blacks are the same angular size, that doesn’t sound likely either. It’s a mystery. But either way, for my particular purpose, both apps failed me. Of course, YMMV.

Decisions behind my next rifle

Over the last few months, I’ve been trying to decide what my next rifle is going to be. I already have a couple of rifles in .223, so I knew I wanted something bigger. I also knew I wanted a rifle I could use in long range practical matches, in short-to-mid distance silhouette matches, and perhaps hunting medium-sized game. I eventually decided to start with a Remington 700 chambered in 260 Remington. While this paring is far from unorthodox, I did investigate and research a wide variety of alternatives, so I will describe them here.

Caliber: 6.5mm
My options were 6mm/.243, 6.5mm/.264, 6.8mm, 7mm, or 7.62mm/.30. I settled on 6.5mm for the following reasons:

• Relatively light recoil – What can I say, I’m a little guy
• Big enough for hunting – In Europe, I hear the 6.5×55 (Swedish Mauser) is a popular hunting round, used even for moose (with good shot placement, obviously).
• Good bullet selection – Lots of match and hunting bullets from Sierra, Nosler and others for reasonable prices, in various weights.
• Very high ballistic coefficient – Heavier 140-142 grain 6.5mm bullets have ballistic coefficients equivalent to 200+ grain .30 caliber bullets. So compared to, say, a 150-175 grain .30 caliber bullet, it’ll have less wind drift and drop, as well as higher retained velocity and energy at long distances.

Platform: Remington 700
Picking the platform (action) was the hardest part. There were a few factors to consider in selecting a platform. My requirements were:

• Accuracy – it should shoot better than I can, which at this point means better than 1 MOA
• Cost – it has to be reasonably affordable (less than $1k)
• Ergonomics – I like pistol grips or thumbhole stocks
• Detachable magazine – seems necessary for practical matches

Here are some of the candidates and what I thought of them.

• AR-15 – As I’ve previously mentioned on this blog, I like the AR-15. Unfortunately, the AR-15 only supports a limited selection of cartridges because the magazines will only seat cartridges up to 2.260″ in length. The most famous (and perhaps the only viable) 6.5mm cartridge that works in the AR-15 is the 6.5 Grendel. In other words, my decision to use or not use the AR-15 platform depended on whether or not the 6.5 Grendel was the right cartridge choice. I ultimately decided the answer was “no”, and I’ll discuss this decision in more detail below.
• AR-10 – For someone who likes the AR-15 but wants to shoot bigger cartridges, the AR-10 seems like a logical choice. I briefly considered this option, but decided against it because of limited availability of lowers in California, and high cost.
• Swedish Mauser – One of the more well known 6.5mm rifles is the Swedish Mauser. Famous for its inherent accuracy, rifles based on these Mausers have been popular hunting rifles in Europe. I happen to own one of these rifles, made in 1902, but I have a weakness for milsurp rifles, and can’t bring myself to drill into the receiver (say, for a scope mount). I also don’t like the stock, but I’m not sure there are very many after market stocks. I also haven’t found a way to add a detachable magazine to these rifles.
• Ishapore 2A1 – The 2A1s are modern Lee Enfield rifles designed specifically for the 7.62 NATO (.308 Win) cartridge. As such, they purportedly are made of stronger steel than their older British brethren, to withstand the higher pressures of a modern military cartridge. I also have one of these, but the muzzle is pretty worn out, and I can’t seem to shoot anything resembling a group with it. One option was to have it rebarreled and chambered for 260 Remington. Since the 260 is based on the 308 case, the cartridges should fit in the detachable box magazines and feed just fine. I ultimately decided against this option because finding a high quality replacement barrel seemed difficult, and also because these rifles aren’t exactly known for their accuracy.
• Creedmoor CSR-1 – If cost weren’t an issue, these rifles have everything I’d want. AR-like ergonomics, detachable magazines, and support for various 6.5mm cartridges. But at $3750, it is unfortunately far beyond my budget.
• Remington 700 – I have a model 700 in .223 that I don’t shoot that much any more, now that I’ve built that bolt action AR, also in .223. At the end, I decided it made the most sense to just have my m700 rebarreled and chambered for a 6.5mm cartridge. High quality replacement barrels are pretty affordable, and I have a friend who can rebarrel it for me, so my up-front costs would be relatively low. At some point, I might spring for an AICS stock to get that pistol grip and detachable magazine, but I can start shooting 6.5mm without it first.

Cartridge: 260 Remington
Some other candidates were 6.5 Grendel, 6.5 Creedmoor, 6.5×47 Lapua, and 6.5-284.

• 6.5 Grendel – I took a nice, long, hard look at the 6.5 Grendel short of actually spending the money to build one. If you absolutely must have (or just plain want) an AR-15 to shoot 6.5mm projectiles, the Grendel seems like the answer you’re looking for. But if you want the best 6.5mm rifle, regardless of platform, there are better cartridges. The main weakness of the 6.5 Grendel is its relatively slow muzzle velocity due to its small case capacity. The Grendel can take about 30 grains of BL-C(2), while maximum loads for 260 Remington calls for up to 38 grains of BL-C(2). Correspondingly, muzzle velocities for Grendel loads seem to be 150-200ft/s slower than the Remington 260 for comparable bullet weights. The ballistic properties of the 6.5 Grendel are still impressive (often comparable to .308 Win), it doesn’t maximize the performance of those 6.5mm pills.
• 6.5 Creedmoor – From what I’ve read, the 6.5 Creedmoor is ballistically similar to the 260 Remington, but has a slightly shorter cartridge length which allows bullets to be seated out further while keeping the overall length short enough to fit in a magazine. I’m sure for top level shooters that’ll make a difference, but I doubt I’d notice any difference. I was ultimately turned off by the high brass prices.
• 6.5×47 – I rejected this cartridge for pretty much the same reason as the 6.5 Creedmoor.
• 6.5-284 – The 6.5-284 has an impressive track record, but also has an extremely short barrel life (supposedly about 1000 rounds). Since I could easily shoot 1000 rounds in a year, I decided I’d rather not have to rebarrel every year, even if it means I might not get the absolute most out of my 6.5mm cartridge.
• 260 Remington – I decided the 260 Remington was right for me because it’s a relatively proven cartridge, has pretty good ballistic properties, and brass is pretty cheap/available (I could either neck up 243 Win or neck-down 7mm-08, of course, in addition to using 260 Remington brass). If you’re interested, “The Case for 260 Remington” is a great read.

After Thought…

One crazy thought I have bouncing around in my head is to design a “lower receiver” to the Remington 700. You’d basically screw on a m700 barreled action to this “lower”, then attach an AR-15 pistol grip, butt stock, and hand guard tube to complete the rifle. The “lower” would also have a magazine well to accept either an AR-10 magazine, or more realistically, an AICS magazine. This all seems possible, but I’ll have to sit down with a CAD software to see…

Bolt action AR

Although I liked my Remington 700 VTR in .223, I also love the AR. It just feels right, in any position, standing, sitting, or prone. Maybe it’s the pistol grip, or the length of pull, or something else, but it just fits and is very comfortable to shoot. Of course, the wide range of accessories, and the detachable magazine is nice too. But, thanks to the direct impingement gas system, I’ve had FTF issues on my AR, and hate the extra cleaning it requires. My bolt guns require less maintenance, and I never have to worry about cycling failures. So, to get the best of both worlds, I tried looking for ways to make my R700 take on similar ergonomics as the AR, which is apparently not an uncommon wish. The MAK Tube Gun Kit and AICS stock can improve the ergonomics and add a detachable magazine, but I was turned off by the cost (an AICS stock costs $700+ used, magazines costs like $70 each).

After much deliberation, I decided to take an AR and make it a bolt gun, instead of trying to make a bolt gun be more like an AR. Since it would still be built on the AR platform, I can use the same lower I use on my Service Rifle (basically an A2). I can also use the same cleaning tools, magazines, and use a wide range of AR accessories and parts, which is something I wouldn’t get with an AR-esque Remington 700.

Although there are gunsmiths who can build such a rifle, I decided to build it myself. The key component was an upper receiver and bolt carrier group from Fulton Armory which has been modified to accept a charging handle on the right side (the bolt carrier is drilled and tapped, and the ejection port extended). I thought about trying to get a barrel without a gas port, but this turned out to be kind of complicated (since it’d be custom order). Instead, I bought a 26″ Krieger AR-15 Varmatch barrel, with a 1:7.75 twist. They had these in stock, so it showed up at my apartment in about 2 weeks. To block the gas port, I simply installed the gas block off-centered (then later rotated it upside down because I was getting stung by gas and ejecta which managed to leak through the gas block and out the rear-facing hole where the gas tube would normally be).

Anyway, here are some pictures of the build, the final product and some targets. Probably not the best groups you’ve seen, but that’s probably my fault, not the rifle’s Since the rifle is basically a free floated barrel attached to an upper, without even a gas tube to create interference, I’m pretty sure it’d be much more accurate in more able hands.

assembly 1

assembly 2

full view

top view

bolt

target

smallest group

Update (2/3/09): Couple of additions that I forgot in the original post… The straight pull action works great in some respects, and not so well in others. In theory, it works great. You pull that handle, let go and let the buffer spring do the work; it’s very fast and easy to operate without breaking position. However, the handle that Fulton Armory ships is too small, and doesn’t give you enough leverage to extract sticky shells. I went to the hardware store and bought a 2″ long 1/4″ diameter fine threaded bolt instead, which works a lot better. The other issue is that, since the upper doesn’t have a shell deflector, your hand acts as a shell deflector. When you yank that handle and the shell comes flying out, there’s a good chance it’ll nick your knuckle on the way out. Fingerless gloves might help, but I might see if I could attach a shell deflector that won’t get in the way.

Obama on Guns

With the election less than a week away, I suspect most of you have made up your minds, and perhaps have even already voted. If you’re one of them, this post isn’t for you. I promise the next post will be politics free, and 100% about guns (it’ll be about a new AR upper I built).

For anyone out there who’s still on the fence, if the one thing that’s keeping you from voting for Obama is his position on guns, I’d encourage you to check out this video:

If you’re concerned it might be biased (and it probably is), check out this analysis on some of NRA’s claims. Now, I won’t lie and say that Obama is going to be a pro-gun President. He does support something similar to the Assault Weapon Ban that we got in the 90’s, and if it comes to it, I’ll be there fighting against it with you. But remember that we face much bigger issues today, whether it’s the economy, the war, health care, social security, education, or even the fact that our country is so politically polarized. On those issues, I think Obama has the right ideas, but to get anything done in those areas, he’d need the support of Republicans and moderate Democrats. That’ll limit his ability to do anything drastic around gun control, especially when his liberal base doesn’t actually consider guns to be a major issue (trust me, ask any liberal to name the top 5 issues, and I’d be surprised if gun control even comes up). So I, for one, am pretty confident my guns will still be safe under his presidency, if he is elected.

SCAR sighting (sortof)

I went to San Francisco today to try and go on a tour of the amphibious assault carrier USS Bonhomme Richard, which is here for Fleet Week. Unfortunately, by the time I found the ship, they weren’t allowing any more people on board, so I wandered into a nearby exhibit put on by the Navy Special Warfare group. And what did I see hanging off the side of an inflatable boat? Yup, a SCAR! One of the sailors(?) told a little boy nearby that it wasn’t real, but it looks more like a real rifle that’s been rendered inoperable (the flash hider looks weird, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s missing the bolt or other crucial parts). At least it looks more real than other mock weapons I’ve seen (which tend to be made of brightly colored plastics with no moving parts).

SCAR

letter to Obama

I’ve stated elsewhere in this blog that I’m a liberal, but I’ll take it up a notch and reveal that I am also an Obama supporter. Wait a minute. A proclaimed gun enthusiast who’s also an Obama supporter? Isn’t that a contradiction? Well, my answer is no, it’s not a contradiction. Obama acknowledges that we have an individual right to own guns, as the Supreme Court recently ruled (and those of you who think he’s going to “sign away our rights” are crazy; he taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago, he knows and respects the Constitution more than you or I — and certainly Bush or McCain). He does support “sensible” gun control laws to decrease gun crimes, but guess what, so does McCain and the Supreme Court. So the difference comes down to what they think of as being “sensible”.

Obama’s views on what’s “sensible” probably is more restrictive than McCain’s views. But here’s the thing about us liberals: we’re open minded. We’re so open minded that we frequently change our minds about things when faced with convincing arguments backed by credible data. Some people call that “flip flopping”, but admitting that you’re wrong isn’t a bad thing. And when it comes to guns, we (gun owners) have the upper hand because most liberals don’t know jack about guns, and their positions are based largely on ignorance. I know this because most of my friends and coworkers are liberal, and it didn’t take much to convince them that having my guns taken away would be wrong (and nonsensical).

So, here’s a letter I’m sending in an attempt to convince Obama (and other liberals) that gun bans simply don’t make sense. Regardless of whether or not you support Obama, I’d encourage other gun bloggers to spread this around. Because if Obama is elected, you’d want him to have read this.

I’m a strong supporter of Senator Obama in his presidential candidacy, and have donated hundreds of dollars to his campaign. I support him because I believe he is a truly inspiring leader, and agree with him on many issues, except one. As a gun owner and a liberal, I find his position on gun control, specifically his support for banning certain types of firearms¹ to be contrary to the liberal ideal.

Let me tell you a story about my friend Anne. Anne is another vocal supporter of Senator Obama. She has a degree in English from a prestigious university in Chicago, and works at a large internet company as a technical writer, while studying for her LSATs. A while back, she went to a local shooting range with some coworkers, and really enjoyed the experience. So I took her to the range recently, and after showing her how to safely operate a variety of rifles I own, I let her shoot them all. Her favorite gun? The AR-15, a civilian version of the M-16 rifle. It is a semi-automatic rifle, and looks like a military rifle to the untrained eye. She liked it so much, that she wants one of her own, except Senator Obama seems to think she shouldn’t be allowed to own one.

Why does Anne need a military-type semi-automatic rifle? Anne doesn’t need ice cream on her apple pie². Anne doesn’t need an occasional glass of wine³. Anne could survive without knowing how to drive too⁴. We don’t need most things in life, but in this country, we are afforded a myriad of freedoms, because freedom is what makes us happy. Anne needs a military-type semi-automatic rifle because it makes her happy⁵, and because nobody has any rational reason to deny a responsible girl like Anne that happiness.

Gun violence is a problem in this country. However, gun bans aren’t the answer. No study to date has shown conclusively that gun bans are effective at all⁶. Yet, gun bans unfairly and irrationally punish law abiding and responsible citizens like myself and Anne. It is analogous to banning alcohol consumption because occasionally someone drives while drunk and kills people. The only reason liberals don’t propose alcohol bans yet support gun bans is because most liberals enjoy alcohol, while most of them never learn about firearms, their safe handling, and why some people enjoy owning and shooting them. However, ignorance is not a sufficient condition for legislation. I’m not attracted to men, but that doesn’t mean other men shouldn’t be. I don’t believe in god, but that doesn’t mean other people shouldn’t either. Liberalism is about inclusiveness and tolerance for views we may not agree with or understand, within reason. Yes, reason. Show me that I, and millions of other law abiding gun owners are a menace to society. Show me that denying us guns will stop criminals from committing crimes. Then I’ll agree to a gun ban. Until then, gun bans are irrational and wrong, and I urge Senator Obama to focus on approaches that more effectively curb gun violence without unnecessarily restricting our right to happiness.

1. 1998 IL State Legislative National Political Awareness Test Jul 2, 1998, as cited on http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm
2. Obesity kills over a 112,000 people every year, according to the CDC.
3. In 2000, 85,000 people were killed by alcohol.
4. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 41,059 people were killed in automobile accidents in 2007.
5. According to at least one study, gun owners are happier even when controlled for income and education.
6. Gun Laws and Crime: A Complex Relationship on NYTimes.com