There are plenty of people out there who are lucky enough to have the skills necessary to make Rifleman with an AR platform, an M1 Garand with iron sights, or something else equally as challenging. I sincerely congratulate them for being able to do this.
However, I was a new Appleseeder and unfortunately I made a pretty big mistake which I hope to be able to warn others about before they do the same.
There is a reason why the "Liberty Training Rifle" is highly recommended for those who are new to the game. It is by nature very light, controllable, easy to use, and ideal to shoot from prone position.
The .22 caliber variants of the AR, however, are none of the above.
Before my first Appleseed, I spent about $450 on a new .22LR Colt M4.
(http://i48.tinypic.com/2a5hlyf.jpg)
I will be honest, I was drawn to the "coolness" factor of it. Why have a boring old Ruger 10/22 that looks like my grandpappy's hunting rifle, when I can have something that looks like a mean, rugged military weapon? Yeah...I was about to find out the value of function over appearance.
Most of Appleseed is done from shooting in the prone position. When you're dealing with a gun whose magazine protrudes that far downward, it is very difficult if not impossible to get your arm down below the gun in the necessary position. Even if you are using only a 10 round mag you will still encounter this problem. That alone is going to cause significant accuracy issues.
Even with the stock fully extended, I found it to be way too short for shooting in the prone position. In fact, this is a common complaint that I have heard among other people who have brought this type of gun to Appleseed. It is yet another factor which will significantly compromise your accuracy.
I am not sure about other .22 ARs, but the stock trigger on the Colt M4 has a 7lb pull. This can greatly throw you off if your trigger finger is at the slightest bit of an angle, which it usually will be since we are all human after all.
Even with the gun locked down in a rifle stand bench rest and the target at 25 yards, the .22LR M4 will shoot groups somewhere within a 1/2" radius, but hardly ever in the same place twice. Again, I am not sure if this applies to any other .22 AR platforms, but this lack of accuracy essentially means that if you do score Rifleman, you simply got very very lucky. In general, Ruger 10/22's are known to be more accurate than their tacticool counterparts who play dress-up in M4/M16 clothing.
I also didn't have a detachable loop sling, so I was forced to use the less-than-ideal Hasty configuration.
So what was the result of all these factors combined? On my first Appleseed, despite having a solid grasp on all the new techniques that I had learned, I did not even qualify at 100 yards. I must say it was very disappointing, and I felt like I missed out on what could have been an extremely fun day if it hadn't been for my own poor decision of a gun purchase. I didn't even show up the next day because I felt it would be pointless.
I then decided that the next time around, I was going to bring something ideal for shooting prone so that I could truly test how well I had learned the skills that Appleseed had taught me. I was lucky enough to be able to borrow a Magnum Research 10/22 with a detachable loop sling, and the scope was dialed in to a hair before the first day.
(http://i46.tinypic.com/hs8jlt.jpg)
I found that I was able to control the gun amazingly well, and my shooting form improved tenfold with the ability to hold the gun in the correct position. I am happy to say that I scored Rifleman on both days.
Now, I do realize that in order to actually be qualified to shoot a target at 400 yards, you have to have a gun whose round can accurately travel that far, and a .22LR will obviously not cut it. But the point is, you have to learn how to walk before you can run. If you want to learn how to accurately shoot a target at long range with a real M16, AR-10, AR-15 or some other variant of that...by all means go ahead and do it. But you should FIRST get the basics down with a gun that is easy to use, and then increase the level of difficulty by switching to a gun that is more difficult.
As for the Colt M4, I have decided to sell it. Why have something that looks like a mean, rugged military weapon that is outperformed by a plain wooden Ruger 10/22?
Good observations Walter and exactly the advice I give folks. Many insist on trying the AR platform until they get frustrated enough to accept the offer of a loaner rifle. I wouldn't give up on it however, it's YOUR rifle, finds it's faults and fix them/customize it to suit yourself. Most the front sight post is too large, replace it break out the file and go to work. Slings? That's fixable. Extended mags? That can be worked around. Too short? I'm 6'4" and never seen an AR platform too short. In fact one of the most common problems is rifles too long. Anyone can shoot a rifle too short for them better than one too long. The trigger.. Most of those will accept standard AR parts and a 2.5# JP trigger is about $90 the last I checked. If you are handy you can make improvements for next to nothing.......O.L.
I have 2 of the Colts SPR versions with the A2 carry handles. I use the 10 Round magazines with no problems. It is the full size stock with a free float barrel. I have the sling swivel attached the free float hand guard that is all machined aluminum. It works great with the right ammo. The barrel is not solid it is actually an inner barrel and outer barrel sleeve and they flex easily. When I purchased them I looked at your version and came to the same conclusion you did. They make 4 versions, the M4 Carbine and M16 Rifle both will have the same problem. The M4 Ops you cannot use the barrel mounted swivel (it's ok if you mount one to the hand guard) and the M16 SPR works great.
The stock trigger is bad, but I shot a 232 last weekend with it. I just sent both of my trigger packs out for a trigger job. They will be under 5 lbs when I get them back.
Thanks for the advice, oladcock.
I am now realizing that this is something I should have mentioned in my first post...but I was using a scope on my M4 at my first Appleseed. In fact, I actually put the exact same scope on the 10/22 when I took it to the next Appleseed and scored Rifleman multiple times on both days. The front sight post was certainly not the issue.
I am not selling it because I am "giving up" on it, I simply no longer see the value in it. I will happily take the money I have made from the sale and use it to buy a Ruger. I prefer the 10/22 infinitely more because I find it much more ergonomic and I prefer the way it functions. Even if I were to take the time to replace enough parts on the M4 to make its accuracy equal to that of the Ruger, I would still have a gun which would be uncomfortable to shoot in prone position.
Quite honestly, the "coolness" factor of it has worn off for me. I have quickly grown to be largely unimpressed with rifles that greatly overstate themselves by looking like something they are not. When I am ready to move up to the next level, I will most likely purchase one that actually shoots the .223 round. But until then, I want my 22 to be a plain 22.
I do realize that everybody has their own personal preferences, and I respect that. But for me personally, there is nothing at this point that can make me like a tactical .22 better than a Ruger 10/22.
I think the 10/22 is a great choice. If you are wanting to run iron sights, I highly recommend Tech-Sights (www.tech-sights.com) vice the stock ones. If a scope is what you want to run, the 10/22 will suit you just fine as well.
Great observations and thanks for posting.
I believe the best use for the AR style .22's is for those who are looking to train themselves on the AR platform.
If your centerfire, is an AR then a .22lr conversion and/or rifle modeled after that is indeed worth its weight in silver.
In fact the idea behind the LTR is to emulate your main rifle as closely/cheaply as possible. So as to allow for cheap practice and to be able to make the transition between the two a seamless as possible.
The 10/22 LTR, set up is real close to that of the M1/M1A.
But if you have not intentions and or desire to operate the AR platform, a .22lr AR is really as you said; not much more than the cool factor.
All that being said, if you were to practice with it and try a few different ammo brands, you might indeed find that your rifle is a little better than you give it credit.
I do not recommend a conversion kit for an AR unless you are OK with 5 MOA. Get either a dedicated .22 upper or a .22 AR like the S&W 15-22. We had a shooter that was shooting a consistant 5 MOA groups for 3 seeds before it dawned on us he was shooting a conversion kit. A .221 bullet rattles around too much in a .224 hole. After he accepted a loaner he shot a Rifleman's score after a couple of AQTs to get used to the rifle. He then stepped up for a hat! I think it was Wheeler.
There is a reason for traditional rifle design.
It works.
The M16/AR15 22 clone sold by Colt is a poor choice. The controls are not the same as the AR platform.
The S&W 15-22 has all the controls of the AR platform and work exactly like those of the AR. It is a better trainer for the AR than the Colt offering, IMHO.
ditto on the remark above
the Colt does not function well, this is one time the Germans screwed up making a gun.
The M&P is way better. Avoid also the Mossberg Plinkster dressed up as an AR, it's worse than the Colt.
I actually have the full linked M16 model w/ a Nikkon scope(poor eyes). The mags are long but force the support elbow directly under the rifle.....a good thing but not for short stature shooters. The controls are not "real" but I figured out how to get around them. A "detailed" cleaning requires a bit of disassembly that can be challenging. With all this .... it does actually group fine. I wouldn't recommend the rifle to others....but I asked her to the dance so there ya go..............
Quote from: Kosciusko on October 23, 2012, 12:58:36 PMThe M&P is way better. Avoid also the Mossberg Plinkster dressed up as an AR, it's worse than the Colt.
You're talking about the 715T, right?
(http://i46.tinypic.com/xc7r12.jpg)
I remember the same day I was at the gun store and bought the Colt, I saw this thing being sold for $250. My first reaction was "wow, what a good deal for a .22 AR, let me see that one". The guy behind the counter just looks at me sideways and says "You don't want this gun" before handing it to me.
I have honestly never laid hands on a cheaper pile of parts in my life. I looked at the receiver and I was surprised to see "Mossberg" instead of "Fisher Price".
Apparently it is actually a dirt-cheap .22 pistol which has a bunch of external tactical rifle parts added to it. On the inside, it functions nothing like the real thing. It even has a fake charging handle.
I think this kind of gun is supposed to be for those 12-13 year old kids who want a .22 rifle that looks cooler than a 10/22, and yet they wouldn't know the difference between this and the M&P so you buy them this one to save a couple hundred dollars. But even then I would still feel bad about doing it.
sure looks like the one I got
I've got bolt-on AR-15 iron sights on mine.
The nice thing is that they take all sorts of AR-15 aftermarket parts, sights, stocks, triggers, etc.
My only complaint is the mags, they should have designed them to take Black Dog Machine mags. S&W mags have to be loaded exactly the way the factory says to, or else they cause the rifle to jam up. BDM mags don't have that problem.
It is a shame Mossberg did that. The modle 64 is a good rifle (semi auto.) The Mossberg bolts shoot well (802 and 801 youth.) The continued production of such a poor rifle as their AR clone puzzles me.
Quote.22 Caliber AR-15 Rifles Are Nowhere Near Ideal For New Appleseeders.
Not necessarily true. It depends.
One of my loaners is a Double Star lower with a dedicated .22 LR CMMG 20" flat top upper with a detachable A2 rear sight. It has a last shot BHO and drop-free mags. I can pretty much get the front post in focus. It was the first iron-sighted rifle I shot a Rifleman score with since 1976. Every new Appleseeder who has used it has loved it and shot well with it. More than one has gotten "angry" with me because they decided they need to go buy one just like it. Before I put this together, I looked at the Wal-Mart .22 "AR's" (S&W I believe) and decided within 30 seconds that they are not suitable. Don't know about the Colts and others.
I don't think there is an "ideal" LTR (although the Marlin 795 comes close), but I KNOW there is an "ideal" Appleseed attendee. This is the shooter who has carefully read the "What to bring" list and perhaps watched Techres' video, brings a rifle that is sighted-in and has a GI web sling, is eager, attentive, writes things down, asks questions, tries all the positions (if able), takes instruction and correction well, helps his neighbors, works through hardware problems without complaining, and comes back for more on Sunday morning with a smile and a can-do attitude.
UL
The CMMG .22 rifle uses a .223 lower with a dedicated upper. This allows you to use your trigger of choice and also drop a .223, etc upper on it should you wish to. It is also easy to swap in a A1 or A2 solid buttstock.
Good post UL... These things are just tools and I can use a ratchet as a hammer if need be, improvise, adapt, and over come, far better to have the correct tool for the job at hand. I'll second the dedicated uppers! :)....O.L.
Quote from: fepowered on October 24, 2012, 03:14:16 AM
The CMMG .22 rifle uses a .223 lower with a dedicated upper. This allows you to use your trigger of choice and also drop a .223, etc upper on it should you wish to. It is also easy to swap in a A1 or A2 solid buttstock.
Per Tech Services at CMMG, the hammer on the Timney trigger will not reliably strike firing pin hard enough to fire the round. They told me in the conversation that a mil spec trigger is what they recommend in thier dedicated uppers for 22LR.
They also indicated that their firing pins are prone to breakage if dry fired.
The CMMG upper is a great tool, just be aware of the above. Mine has been serving me well as a loaner and has shot rifleman scores more than once.
Wow. I just read UL's post and was transported back in time. I was working a shoot in southern Kentucky under weird circumstances when I met UL and he was in a blue hat and convinced that he was not orange or state coordinator material. Wow was he wrong. Not only did he take over a state that was listless and having trouble getting going and turn it around, but look at the quality of Appleseeder he is. Not only is that a sage and valuable comment, but it is one coming from a very active instructor and state coordinator who really gets the program. (Not only that but my spy network informs me that he is a diligent, comprehensive, and gifted instructor)
Quote from: GEmanuel on October 24, 2012, 01:16:52 PM
Per Tech Services at CMMG, the hammer on the Timney trigger will not reliably strike firing pin hard enough to fire the round. They told me in the conversation that a mil spec trigger is what they recommend in thier dedicated uppers for 22LR.
They also indicated that their firing pins are prone to breakage if dry fired.
The CMMG upper is a great tool, just be aware of the above. Mine has been serving me well as a loaner and has shot rifleman scores more than once.
I have a milspec trigger in mine on which I performed the $.50 trigger job and it is great.
Who at CMMG told you about the possible firing pin breakage? I asked them specifically about dry firing my 20" Gov't Profile .22 Upper, Part Number: 22B6A17:
Q: Is it safe to dry fire this upper?
A: Yes, it is safe. (As per Josh Humphrey at CMMG Tech. Support / Customer Service)
UL
I realize that this thread is old, but it resonated with me and my own experience with AS, so I want to add my 2 cents. I had purchased an AR15, early last year, so that is what I took to my first AS. I learned the hard way that the rifle I had put together was "far less than ideal" for AS. And with 5.56 ammo, it was a fairly expensive lesson, too! But I did learn something, nevertheless, and I started planning for AS #2. Since I really wanted to learn to shoot my M4, I began researching ways to shoot .22 rimfire in an AR platform. I quickly ruled out the conversion kits, based on accuracy, alone. I looked at some of the AR styled .22s, but some were expensive (S&W), and some were just too crummy (Mossberg should be ashamed!). For me, the choice came down to one of two options:
- buy a dedicated .22LR upper for my AR
- buy a whole different rifle
The dedicated .22LR upper for AR was expensive, but it offered the promise of allowing me to train and familiarize myself with the AR platform. I could buy a whole new rifle for half that money. In retrospect, perhaps I should have!
I bought a CMMG Evolution .22LR carbine length upper with a pencil barrel for roughly $400. While I was in my break-in period at the range, I noticed that the CMMG wasn't grouping worth a darn! My first group was close to 6" at 25 yds! As I got closer to 100 rounds through it, the groups had tightened to about 2 1/2"@25 yds. In addition to this, I was getting one or more jams per every 10 rounds. It was really just no fun at all!
I worked with CMMG for many months. They eventually replaced the barrel, swapped out the collar/feed ramp (several times), re-checked the crown, upgraded the bolt/carrier group to all SS, etc. But even they finally conceded that this rifle would not shoot better than 0.5" groups @25 (my best was more than twice that). So that means this gun was capable of only 2-4+ MOA. If we assume that a consistent 4 MOA performance is required for a Rifleman patch, starting with a 4 MOA rifle would make that feat difficult, indeed!
It was a long, hard fought battle, but CMMG finally refunded my money. (NOTE: I would NOT expect this outcome, as a general rule. Buyer beware!) For Christmas, my wife bought me a Remington 597 (it was on my list...;-) for $160. My first impressions of that rifle were appalling (See my post on rimfirecentral for the details)! But the redeeming hope was that this rifle had a reputation for being a "bargain basement tack-driver". I bought some decent glass for it ($225), and now I've got a rifle that will shoot same hole groups @25!
As of two weeks ago, I am now a Rifleman. And with my money back, I am starting to think about picking up another LTR (I really like the sound of the Marlin LTR.). And when I do, I would like to get another Rifleman patch with iron sights.
Quote from: Unbridled Liberty on October 24, 2012, 05:55:41 PM
Quote from: GEmanuel on October 24, 2012, 01:16:52 PM
Per Tech Services at CMMG, the hammer on the Timney trigger will not reliably strike firing pin hard enough to fire the round. They told me in the conversation that a mil spec trigger is what they recommend in thier dedicated uppers for 22LR.
They also indicated that their firing pins are prone to breakage if dry fired.
The CMMG upper is a great tool, just be aware of the above. Mine has been serving me well as a loaner and has shot rifleman scores more than once.
I have a milspec trigger in mine on which I performed the $.50 trigger job and it is great.
Sorry I haven't seen this thread in months. It was Tim in Tech Services whom I spoke with after I broke a firing pin. He advised me that they did not recommend dry fire. He also sent me a new n/c firing pin which was substantialy beefier in the notch area and had a different head as well. It is possible that they discovered the flaw and had a redesign of the pin. You may well have gotten a newer version, thus the different stories. I have had no issues with the new pin, but am still hesitant to do much dry firing with it.
I would suggest you keep an eye on the notch area for any signs of weakness. Also, the head on the new pin has flat sides and a rounded top. The older pins were semi circular in cross section.
Hope this helps,
George
Who at CMMG told you about the possible firing pin breakage? I asked them specifically about dry firing my 20" Gov't Profile .22 Upper, Part Number: 22B6A17:
Q: Is it safe to dry fire this upper?
A: Yes, it is safe. (As per Josh Humphrey at CMMG Tech. Support / Customer Service)
UL
I know at least two riflemen who earned their patches with CMMG conversion kits installed in 16" midlength carbines. I wish that I could remember their scores. You do want a non-notched trigger for the CMMG.
I know of another who used a Model 1 sales dedicated 20" upper to fire a 235 on his first AQT and failed to get off 3 shots in sitting (which he shot standing).
Note to all if you plan to shoot sitting standing, you cannot wait for the line to start firing. Due to the recovery time, you need to start firing as soon as the command is given. Otherwise you too will fail to get off some rounds.
There is no doubt that AR type .22's can make the grade. What you have to be careful of is sling pressure on light pencils barrels. There are barrels with float tubes out there, however.
On the AR side in general I have used a 5.56 to shoot rifleman scores at 25m and at KD. I have done so with both iron sights and a scope. By the same token, their is nothing wrong with a stock 10/22 with tech sights or scope, or a stock 795 outfitted with either to shoot well at 25m. I have also seen the S&W 15/22 used to shoot a rifleman's score. It had had some trigger work though.
My stock 15/22 has done 242 at events using bulk ammo.
Any rifle can do it. It's just a matter of what challenge level you want to work with. The 15/22 is very different than the colt and much easier to work with. But try not to focus too much on gear. The list of rifles that have achieved rifleman patches is as long as the list of rifles and trigger jobs, match gear, match ammo, and so on are simply no required for a "rack grade" based test.
Totally agree that the Colt M4 .22 is a challenge to work with, but it can be done. Would I want to own a rifle that upset me? No, been there and done that. But at the same time, try to avoid the gear game as much as possible. It is more of a distraction than anything and money spent on race parts is money that could have been spent on ammo for practice.
Definitely hope you like your new rifle and hope to meet you on the line!
Without turning this into a "i can shoot a score with it" argument, I will add my opinion.
To me, Marksmanship is generally 75% skill and 25%equipment. A skilled shooter can shoot well with a mediocre rifle but someone who has not developed their skills will shoot poorly with a good one.
That being said, when developing skills it helps not to have to overcome limitations in equipment. The sight radius and reliability of the ar-22 type rifles are such limitations. Can a shooter overcome those limitations with skill? Yes. Would I recommend one to a new shooter? I would, with the caveat that they will need to overcome additional obstacles that may be disheartening when their goal is to improve their marksmanship skills.
In short, If you first know you're equipment then developing the marksmanship skills becomes less burdensome and vice-versa. But if you are trying to overcome equipment issues and learn good marksmanship skills. You will be fighting on 2 fronts.
CH
Quote from: CharlieHotel on April 03, 2013, 11:56:42 AM
Without turning this into a "i can shoot a score with it" argument, I will add my opinion.
To me, Marksmanship is generally 75% skill and 25%equipment. A skilled shooter can shoot well with a mediocre rifle but someone who has not developed their skills will shoot poorly with a good one.
That being said, when developing skills it helps not to have to overcome limitations in equipment. The sight radius and reliability of the ar-22 type rifles are such limitations. Can a shooter overcome those limitations with skill? Yes. Would I recommend one to a new shooter? I would, with the caveat that they will need to overcome additional obstacles that may be disheartening when their goal is to improve their marksmanship skills.
In short, If you first know you're equipment then developing the marksmanship skills becomes less burdensome and vice-versa. But if you are trying to overcome equipment issues and learn good marksmanship skills. You will be fighting on 2 fronts.
CH
^This. Well said.
Agreed. The only exception would be if your equipment is physically unable to perform the task asked of it.
My little update going back to UL's first post. I've got a few months now on my CMMG 20" dedicated upper. Nothing but impressed with that thing. Accurate as heck and almost cheating, it's so easy to shoot, partly due to it's weight, it weighs the same as a normal AR, and ZERO muzzle rise. Used a scope to start with but went to irons just because I can. Shooting it in the NRA silhouette master class and giving the target rifles with target sights a run for their money and seldom do the scope shooters best it. Chaps their backsides struggling against a "black" rifle. When I'm looking to shoot a best score on the AQT, I'll grab it over any of the 4 10-22's we have...O.L.
The problem that I saw repeatedly was people showing up and taking the rifles out of the box for the first time. When this happened in 2008, we found it worthy of comment. By 2011 it was so common that no one thought anything of it. In other words they didn't know their rifle at all and the instructors had ceased to be surprised when this happened.
Some of these people were disappointed that they failed to shoot a rifleman score with a new rifle and no previous experience. Good shooting is a perishable skill and a skill that requires work. No where was this more apparent than at the numerous KD and RBC's that I worked or ran. It's not just students who have no real zero or a zero for a completely different batch of ammunition.
Without at least a reliable 25m zero, a KD AQT can become an exercise in frustration and a waste of ammunition. For the most part people did well at 100 and 200 yards. But at 300, I was reminded of the words of W.B. Yeats in The Second Coming, "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;"
Quote from: jmdavis on April 03, 2013, 01:47:34 PM
The problem that I saw repeatedly was people showing up and taking the rifles out of the box for the first time. When this happened in 2008, we found it worthy of comment. By 2011 it was so common that no one thought anything of it. In other words they didn't know their rifle at all and the instructors has ceased to be surprised when this happened.
Some of these people were disappointed that they failed to shoot a rifleman score with a new rifle and no previous experience. Good shooting is a perishable skill and a skill that requires work. No where was this more apparent than at the numerous KD and RBC's that I worked or ran. It's not just students who have no real zero or a zero for a completely different batch of ammunition.
Without at least a reliable 25m zero, a KD AQT can become an exercise in frustration and a waste of ammunition. For the most part people did well at 100 and 200 yards. But at 300, I was reminded of the words of W.B. Yeats in The Second Coming, "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;"
Perfectly stated, and all true. O0
YHJ
Agree with Charlie Hotel. we've seen a lot of RM scores with a variety of equipment. The new shooters seem to have the most difficulty, and a lot of that is just familiarizing themselves with equipment. [Like the Ruger &$%$$ bolt release]
So, if you are not new, but new to A/S, then your equipment probably won't stand in your way.
That said, I hope I never see one of those Mossbergs again: they make a good club.
Thanks for the many replies to my post. What I am saying is this: I know from much experience shooting this particular CMMG Evolution upper from a bench rest that the best group with the best ammo (I tried about 8 different brands/loads) that I EVER got with it was 1 1/8". At 25 yds, that equates to about 4 1/2 MOA. That just also happens to be the silhouette height of the 400 yd target. Assuming that I could get 4.5 MOA from the gun, consistently (which I doubt, because 1 1/8" was the best I ever managed with any ammo on any day), I would STILL have no chance of shooting a decent score on the AQT, because inherent rifle (in)accuracy and shooter error are additive.
To state this another way: If the the best the rifle can do is 4 MOA, then the absolute best that the rifleman can do is 4 MOA (assuming the rifleman is absolutely perfect!). Does anyone disagree with what I am saying, here?
The more I ponder my assertion (rifle error and shooter error are addative) above, the more complex it seems to become. For example, on a given shot, it is conceivable that the shooter error was because the shooter held high but the rifle error happened to be that the bullet POI was below POA, then the two error components would actually tend to cancel each other-for this particular combination of errors. But there are many more cases one could consider where the two error components were additive than cancelling. So I maintain that a rifle inherently capable only of 4 MOA, even in the hands of a superb rifleman, will produce >4+ MOA on the target. That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it!!
P.S. I really wanted to post some photos, here, but I can't seem to get the attachments feature to work for me. (At least nothing is showing up in my Preview of this post.) Can someone suggest why Attachments doesn't work for me?
Was that with irons or scope? My CMMG will shoot 2 moa with CCI MM slung up in prone, I'd be afraid to see what it'd do off a bench. That said, every gun is different and no doubt you can have 2 just alike to the eyeball in every respect and one will be a shooter, the other will not. How many rounds you got through it? If less than 1000, keep shooting, just about all will get better as the round count goes up. I use bore polish on any new gun to speed up the process but this one still didn't settle down till past 500 rounds.
If you were shooting irons, I'd suspect the front sight that's too wide and the short sight radius was 90% of your problem. I got the 20" just for the sight radius. I've got JP trigger on this lower that's about 2.5#
Yep, if the gun shoots 2 moa and you shoot 2 moa, you'll have 4 moa groups. Anything you do between the gun and yourself to cut your groups in half, you double your effective range...O.L.
Quote from: oladcock on April 03, 2013, 11:50:26 PM
Was that with irons or scope?
That's with a 2-7x32 scope. And like the original poster, I chose not to own that rifle, anymore. CMMG replaced the barrel in there, at some point, then they "re-crowned" it a couple times, but I burned well over 500 rounds before I gave up on the CMMG altogether. I can't think of a good use for a 4 MOA rifle, these days--especially with ammo being the way it is!
Quote from: b1rdd0g on April 04, 2013, 01:09:57 AM
Quote from: oladcock on April 03, 2013, 11:50:26 PM
Was that with irons or scope?
That's with a 2-7x32 scope. And like the original poster, I chose not to own that rifle, anymore. CMMG replaced the barrel in there, at some point, then they "re-crowned" it a couple times, but I burned well over 500 rounds before I gave up on the CMMG altogether. I can't think of a good use for a 4 MOA rifle, these days--especially with ammo being the way it is!
I'd would have liked to have seen it, shot a 231 with mine today even with a hicup on my part on stage 2.....O.L.
Hello Appleseeders,
I'm new here. I completed my first shoot this past weekend. I participated with the Colt M4 OPS .22, just like the individual that started this thread.
I managed to score a "sharp-shooter" score, but I did not make rifleman. I was only equipped with the 25rd mags for this rifle, and on Phase 4 of the AQT my mag was hitting the ground and making it hard to maintain a consistent NPOA. I am working on tracking down the 10rd mags for this rifle, but every retailer (online) seems to be out-of-stock.
I do have a Ruger 10/22 that was given to me as a gift. The stock is wood and was custom carved and engraved by the family member that gave it to me. I wouldn't want to take the stock to a shoot weekend for fear it would get dinged up. The nice thing about the 10/22 is that changing stocks is really easy. I'd like to put the a synthetic stock on this rife and take it to my next shoot (where I'll hope to shoot a rifleman score).
Does anyone here have any experience with the ProMag Archangel Ruger 10/22 Stock Kit (http://www.promagindustries.com/product-p/aa556r.htm). PLEASE: disregard the bayonet (I have no need for it). While the functionality is different (bolt, mag release, etc...), I like the idea of something that essentially feels like shooting my Colt M4 .22 or my AR.
Any input? Any experience with this synthetic stock?
Thanks!!!
There are aspects of the Archangel stock the strike me as clumsy (namely the front rail mount).
I actually like the synthetic stocks by ATI a bit better...though they're not necessarily "AR feel" with respect to outside dimensions.
I think I'll go with an ATI synthetic stock and the adjustable aperture sights from Tech-Sights.
Before reading about Tech-Sights in another thread, I was operating under the impression that I would need a rail at both ends of the rifle in order to mount aperture sights (thus, the Archangel).
Now I know differently!
Thanks again!!!
We had a shooter with one of these on the line last shoot...
http://store.troyind.com/Troy_Chassis_T_22_Tactical_p/scha-t22-s0bt-00.htm
Very cool looking with a nice sight radius. Quite spendy, though. Forum member Draken was using it. He shot score with it.
tk
I agree with Walter on a lot of his observations and have a few to add.
I am a female shooter. I own a wide range of rifles, but I started out with a Marlin and then bought a Ruger 10/22 just before my first Appleseed. I'm so glad I did. The Ruger 10/22 is such a customizable and user friendly gun, including for young and women shooters. It's lightweight, comfortable to hold, you can find all sorts of accessories that will improve your shooting accuracy, such as improved trigger assemblies, competition stocks and so much more that are readily available, inexpensive and easy to swap out the stock parts.
In regard to the AR platform, Walter outlined all of the issues most people find when tackling an Appleseed for the first time while also trying to tackle the AR platform within the AS AQT guidelines. My dad tried it with the AR .22 and was extremely frustrated trying to tackle everything at once. For those who have already achieved rifleman and want to re-qualify with an AR, it is likely that they already have a good handle on the AQT drill and shooting techniques to know how to jerry rig what needs modifying and how to compensate for long magazines and a more compact rifle.
However, the reality is that the AR platform brings with it greater complexity of handling, and will likely require some creative modifications to make is useable in an AS situation. I have found getting the swivels to work properly for the hasty sling a little tough because the tactical stocks are often hollow and don't usually come with the same swivel base you will use for the hasty. They are designed to work with tactical slings which are very different and serve a totally different function. Also, tactical stocks can be difficult for some to get a good check weld depending on the model.
Having said all that, I am very excited to attend my first AS of the year next month with my .223 AR 15. I qualified last year with my Ruger and now I want to re-qualify with a centerfire. I know it will be a challenge, but I feel confident in what I've learned and that I can now focus on getting the gun ready and working out the kinks before I attend.
For new AS attendees wanting to use an AR...
One of the lessons you will learn is that the Colonists did not have the biggest shiniest most spectacular weapons. The Regulars did. The British Regulars had super awesome looking firearms with highly polished bayonets they used to intimidate their enemies. They counted on the intimidation factor to give them an edge.
The problem is they couldn't shoot well at a distance. The colonists only had the most basic of firearms, but they outmatched the Regulars by far because they learned their weapons and learned how to shoot accurately at double the distance of the Regulars.
So just because it looks cool doesn't mean it is the best rifle for the job. No matter what rifle you choose, it still boils down to your ability to learn how to use it properly. And making that task simple means you will want to come back to more events and elevate your skill, and not leave your first AS event feeling defeated.
Quote from: Ringer68 on July 29, 2013, 12:57:09 AM
So just because it looks cool doesn't mean it is the best rifle for the job. No matter what rifle you choose, it still boils down to your ability to learn how to use it properly. And making that task simple means you will want to come back to more events and elevate your skill, and not leave your first AS event feeling defeated.
Agreed. Skill beats gear. Every. Single. Time.
Quote from: Roland on July 29, 2013, 01:10:51 PM
Quote from: Ringer68 on July 29, 2013, 12:57:09 AM
So just because it looks cool doesn't mean it is the best rifle for the job. No matter what rifle you choose, it still boils down to your ability to learn how to use it properly. And making that task simple means you will want to come back to more events and elevate your skill, and not leave your first AS event feeling defeated.
Agreed. Skill beats gear. Every. Single. Time.
And one's ability to modify their gear to "fit" is part of the skills we should be teaching. I disagree with Ringer, the AR platform is every bit as customizable as a 10-22 if not more so, just costs a bit more. When unfamiliar with any rifle the user is going to stumble till they learn/practice. AR's in my opinion is every bit as user friendly as a 10-22 if not more so. I see LE and Mil stumble and fumble with both, their biggest problem with the AR's is they've been taught a manual of arms around CQB, not SDM which is different, and Ringer if she's been taught anything at all with AR's by someone with experience, it's most likely going to be with a CQB mentality, not SDM........O.L.
Quote from: oladcock on July 29, 2013, 02:06:50 PM
And one's ability to modify their gear to "fit" is part of the skills we should be teaching. I disagree with Ringer, the AR platform is every bit as customizable as a 10-22 if not more so, just costs a bit more. When unfamiliar with any rifle the user is going to stumble till they learn/practice. AR's in my opinion is every bit as user friendly as a 10-22 if not more so. I see LE and Mil stumble and fumble with both, their biggest problem with the AR's is they've been taught a manual of arms around CQB, not SDM which is different, and Ringer if she's been taught anything at all with AR's by someone with experience, it's most likely going to be with a CQB mentality, not SDM........O.L.
I agree.
I shot my Rifleman score with a dedicated .22 AR. So did my wife, my cousin, his wife, a friend and my brother-in-law. That is 6 people. Note - everyone had their own dedicated .22 AR - not the same rifle. Four used iron sites, two had scopes.
Brad
Quote from: Brad76 on July 29, 2013, 05:28:07 PM
Quote from: oladcock on July 29, 2013, 02:06:50 PM
And one's ability to modify their gear to "fit" is part of the skills we should be teaching. I disagree with Ringer, the AR platform is every bit as customizable as a 10-22 if not more so, just costs a bit more. When unfamiliar with any rifle the user is going to stumble till they learn/practice. AR's in my opinion is every bit as user friendly as a 10-22 if not more so. I see LE and Mil stumble and fumble with both, their biggest problem with the AR's is they've been taught a manual of arms around CQB, not SDM which is different, and Ringer if she's been taught anything at all with AR's by someone with experience, it's most likely going to be with a CQB mentality, not SDM........O.L.
I agree.
I shot my Rifleman score with a dedicated .22 AR. So did my wife, my cousin, his wife, a friend and my brother-in-law. That is 6 people. Note - everyone had their own dedicated .22 AR - not the same rifle. Four used iron sites, two had scopes.
Brad
Brad,
Out of curiosity, what dedicated .22 AR upper did you and your kin shoot? I had a $400 dedicated CMMG .22 AR upper that was apparently a lemon of a lemon. That rifle could not shoot better than 6+ MOA from a bench rest with the best ammo I could find (CCI 40gr Tactical). In contrast, I traded up (sic) to a $160 Remington 597 that consistently holds <1 MOA. I was able to shoot Rifleman on my first Appleseed outing with that rifle--twice in a row.
But while I am at it, I'd like to comment a little bit on the topic of "fit" for purpose. I have an AR 15 for one purpose only--to shoot a tactical rifle course. I went to the 4-day Practical Rifle course at Front Sight this past Spring. It is a DPMS Oracle (ada "smooth side") upper with a Burris MTAC 1x-4x-24mm scope (>50 eyes can't focus the front sight post, anymore...). It is a short, 16" barrel (M4 style configuration) with adjustable stock, 2-pt tactical sling, yada yada. It is made for CQB. And it is extremely well suited for CQB, by my estimation. And the quality of my rifle still somewhat exceeds the skills of its owner--but I'm working on that. Anyway, of the many things that I've learned, one is that the tactical scopes are not necessarily well suited to "bulls eye" shooting. Or even the 25 yd AQT, for that matter. Oh it can certainly be done, and once I master my rifle and my scope, I will do it, to. (After my Rifleman score with the Rem 597, I shot only 4 points shy with my AR before packing up to go home.) But I would definitely say that the effort is a bit steeper with the AR, as a stock AR doesn't exactly lend itself to precision shooting. The stock triggers are horrid. The sight radius is short. And the "dot" in my MTAC scope obliterates the target at 25 yds. (It is zeroed at 50 yds--yet another adjustment...) Once I master it, I can compensate for those things, and I will. But my Rem 597 is zeroed at 25 yds and is, hands down, better suited to shooting the 25 yd AQT.
One of the things I have enjoyed about Appleseed is learning what works--and also learning what doesn't work. I had several occasions to do some "Appleseed Engineering" on both my Appleseed shoots. And since my class at Front Sight, I am making still more adjustments to my rifle and to my plan for improvement. I've even done a fair amount to lay gun smithing, too. And to me, this is probably more than half the fun of the whole deal!
B1rdd0g, Mine is a CMMG....You describe the typical AR made for CQB. The thing about these things is you can mix and match to do the job you want it to do. My CMMG...20"...100% reliable with SV or HV, shoots half the group size of the best 10-22 we own with whatever ammo you want to pick, easily under 2 moa with decent ammo. Yes, AR triggers suck, run $100 JP's in all of ours. So other than the trigger, it's stock. The thing about someone saying AR's aren't adaptable, with the adjustable stock it'll fit a 9 year old, or someone 6'6". Once a person gets the stock and trigger they like, you can run .22lr to .50 uppers and a dozen calibers in-between and the "feel" is the same due to the common lower. Heck they even make a muzzle loading upper! What for I don't know? Yes, you might have got a lemon, or you were asking it to do what that combination wasn't designed for. All I know is the master class NRA silhouette shooters hate to see me show up with my black rifle, I've taken "over all iron sights" with it many times, shooting against high $$$ target rifles and sights. I too once upon a time was under the impression AR's were not accurate and unreliable, I was dead wrong on both counts. We made mistakes in the first ones we bought. A1's and A2's in carbine lengths. I still run A2's for irons but A3's when we use scopes. Stay away from the "carbines" and get rifle length, that gives plenty of sight radius even with a 16" barrel. They surprised me on how capable they are....O.L.