Good job. I miss the days when my eyes would allow me to shoot that well with irons. 4 moa allows hits on a 20" target at 500My M16A4 clone build.
FN M16 contract barrel
Milspec upper (cant remember the manufacturer)
Colt carry handle
KAC RAS rail
PSA lower
550 dollars total investment
View attachment 98708320200301_114626 by chase, on Flickr
View attachment 98708420200301_140035 by chase, on Flickr
per title, it could also have been contact distance500 yds. As per title of the thread
Those weren't 500 yard groups, more like 50 yards.500 yds. As per title of the thread
Those weren't 500 yard groups, more like 50 yards.
Still respectable
My M16A4 clone build.
FN M16 contract barrel
Milspec upper (cant remember the manufacturer)
Colt carry handle
KAC RAS rail
PSA lower
550 dollars total investment
View attachment 98708320200301_114626 by chase, on Flickr
View attachment 98708420200301_140035 by chase, on Flickr
Im pretty sure most GI 5.56 is loaded to a spec of around 2 moa. At least that's what I usually get on the "worst end" from prone with GI ammo at 100 yards. 2" +/-. Usually a little better than that though.
Depending on the gun and with reloads it likes, it can be bug holes.
And both of those results can be from the same gun, at the same time, with a simple mag/ammo change.
ETA: This is from my copy of the Lake City load manual. Its a a tad dated, 1969, but still gives an idea. I doubt it changed a whole lot.
View attachment 987400
Its good that Ruger addressed the accuracy problems that the older Minis had, but Ive never understood that if they were going to try and miniaturize the M14, why they didn't copy the M14's sights and a couple of other things too. Their sights have always been crap.
Back in the 80's there was a company who made an aftermarket M14 rear sight copy for the Mini's, and they seemed to be well made and pretty nice. Never got to shoot one, but the one I saw, worked just like the M14's, with repeatable "clicks" that could be quickly and easily adjusted. Would have been just that easy for Ruger, but......
I had three of the 180 series Minis back in the 70's and 80's, and none of them would shoot as well as my Colt SP1 I have, and had when I had them. Took me three Minis to figure out I didn't just get a bad gun.
My buddy has a couple of the NRA 16" 580 guns, and they shoot much better than the 180's, and I was somewhat impressed, but I still think the box stock AR's will likely outshoot them in a true shoot-out. Once you start to build guns looking for more precision, there's no comparison.
Sights again are a big issue, and Ruger still comes up short there. And like the M14's, optics are still kind of an issue, although at least they tried with the later guns to address it.
As far as paper punching at 500, they all do punch holes, and Ive yet to see anyone volunteer to stand on top of the 500 yard butts and show us how poor the 5.56's are at shooting live things at that distance.
Wow, okay a couple things.
1. The title of the thread was a bit tongue in cheek reference the closed down M1 Garand thread.
2. Those targets were shot at 50 yards. Those pics have been used in a previous post regarding AR accuracy.
3. The target data clearly shows the group size in inches and MOA. Pretty clear that a 1.5 inch 3 MOA group is not a 500 yard group.
4. 5.56 will still punch a hole completely through you at 500 yards.
Nice build.
anyone who can read and do 3rd grade match can figure out he's showing 50yrd groups LOL
77gr works well at 500, but larger calibers, like 6.5G, 6.8SPC, and the beloved Garand will CLANG steel louder though
View attachment 987429