My thimble of knowledge almost runneth over. First, you guys are enablers. My plans to join and participate in 25M rimfire now have me thinking KD and actually attempting distance shooting. Anyway, it seems for that an AR platform might be the best choice for me for recoil limitation and ongoing expenses reduction.
I think I know if yours is chambered for .223 you are best advised to not shoot 5.56x45 ammo through it and vice versa. I further think I know if you have one chambered in .223 Wylde you can safely and effectively shoot either ammo in it. Any part of that true?
If that is the case that seems the choice to make. Then I know I like the idea of an 18" barrel more than the usual 16". Any reason not to go with an 18"? Or would it be wiser to step up to a 20" barrel for thinking 400 yards?
And gas systems, again I think I know the longer the gas system the more recoil reduction. Can you use a rifle length gas system on an 18" barrel? If not, that's another point in favor of going to 20".
Finally, I REALLY like the look of the fixed stock and removable carry handle of the "old fashioned" rifles. Any reason to not go with that? I know there's no mounting of lights etc. but I don't intend to do that. The only thing I can think of is no bipod but I don't know if those are allowed or recommended either.
Quote from: LDB415 on January 02, 2026, 10:18:40 AMMy thimble of knowledge almost runneth over. First, you guys are enablers. My plans to join and participate in 25M rimfire now have me thinking KD and actually attempting distance shooting. Anyway, it seems for that an AR platform might be the best choice for me for recoil limitation and ongoing expenses reduction.
100% - the days of cheap milsurp rifles are essentially over, the AR-10 is the rack-grade .30 cal rifle of the modern day, and the AR-15 is a great ammo-expense-saving learning platform for it.
Quote from: LDB415 on January 02, 2026, 10:18:40 AMI think I know if yours is chambered for .223 you are best advised to not shoot 5.56x45 ammo through it and vice versa. I further think I know if you have one chambered in .223 Wylde you can safely and effectively shoot either ammo in it. Any part of that true?
5.56x45 is slightly longer in a certain dimension than .223 Remington. Result:
* A 5.56x45 chamber can accept both cartridges safely but may be less accurate with .223 Remington.
* Yes, a .223 Remington chamber may experience dangerous overpressure with 5.56x45 ammunition.
* Yes, a .223 Wylde chamber is a compromise that is able to safely and accurately shoot either cartridge.
Quote from: LDB415 on January 02, 2026, 10:18:40 AMIf that is the case that seems the choice to make. Then I know I like the idea of an 18" barrel more than the usual 16". Any reason not to go with an 18"? Or would it be wiser to step up to a 20" barrel for thinking 400 yards?
A 16" barrel already gives you enough velocity to make hits on our KD targets at 400 yards. A 20" barrel is for (a) putting more energy on target at that distance, and (b) being effective beyond 400 yards, which we do not teach but I encourage you to learn about elsewhere.
Quote from: LDB415 on January 02, 2026, 10:18:40 AMAnd gas systems, again I think I know the longer the gas system the more recoil reduction. Can you use a rifle length gas system on an 18" barrel? If not, that's another point in favor of going to 20".
A longer gas system reduces the amount of gas going into the receiver - yes, many rifles and complete uppers (e.g. 16" barrel in 5.56 with carbine-length gas) are sold in an "overgasssed" condition and one symptom of that is excess recoil. As dirt, sand, frozen+gunked lubricant, etc etc, build up over the lifetime of the rifle sold to the stereotypically neglectful customer, the excess gas is applying brute force to overcome the lack of cleaning, so that it "still works". Putting too long of a gas system (e.g. 16" barrel in 5.56 with rifle-length gas, aka a "dissipator") can result in an "undergassed" condition which may easily fail to chamber the next cartridge after a shot. The length of the gas system is but one term in this equation, however, and you can learn all about most of the others at https://www.guntweaks.com/ar-15-reliability-test-cases.html.
I wouldn't be surprised, of course, if someone makes 18" barrels with the hole and journal placed at rifle-length.
Quote from: LDB415 on January 02, 2026, 10:18:40 AMFinally, I REALLY like the look of the fixed stock and removable carry handle of the "old fashioned" rifles. Any reason to not go with that? I know there's no mounting of lights etc. but I don't intend to do that. The only thing I can think of is no bipod but I don't know if those are allowed or recommended either.
No, we teach you how to shoot without using a bipod.
One factor that comes to mind is rifle fitment. If you have unusually short (or long) arms, then the fixed stock's length-of-pull may be incorrect for you.
Another factor that comes to mind is that with the traditional-style handguard, with the sling swivel attached to the gas block, your sling tension will deflect the barrel downwards, resulting in a zero that differs from benchrest and may differ from position to position. Some people prefer to eliminate that variable by using a free-floated handguard, others tolerate the extra column in their databooks.
That said, the selection of handguard (which is what affects bipod compatibility) is independent of the selection of rear sights and buttstock. For example, my favorite centerfire rifle has a free-float handguard, a fixed A2-style stock and a flat-top upper receiver that could accept a detachable carry handle.
The two military vs civilian cartridge debates are the .223/5.56 and the .306/7.62x51
There is no fuzz on the first one. Get the 5.56 chambered rifle. It is a more powerful round and can shoot both headspacings. The Wylde is niche, but you can do it if you must and will pay more.
On the other debate, the .308 Winchester is more powerful than the 7.62x51, yet the 7.62 is longer, so it helps to pay attention there, especially when some receivers are not marked truthfully. Rule of thumb there unless it is old and European, it can usually do .308.
I would recommend learning the classic M16/M4 sighting system and mounting a sling correctly. Fixed stock is preferable. Lights, lasers, bipods, can openers, brass catchers, red dots and flip on magnifiers, and other sorts of high speed door kicking stuff is not needed for field marksmanship; that is more of a carbine role, and there are classes in other programs for that.
I'll admit up front. My goal is fun. I do all of this just because I enjoy it. Learning, which I'll do a lot of in Appleseed, is a nice bonus to the goal of I enjoy it. I'm not interested in being the next SWAT guy so I don't need stuff attached to my rifle. I can see a bipod maybe, but not really anything else. So I want to make the best choices for just most accurate shooting and least recoil while doing so.
It sounds like the 5.56x45 is the way to go. That if .223 ammo is used it might lose a small amount of accuracy while the bullet jumps the gap to the barrel but is safe where the other way could mean pressure and safety issues. So I'll shop for a 5.56 rifle.
I know some guys can see and shoot 400 yards, and farther, without optical aid. And some have talked about 4x and 2x-7x scopes, but all that seems far less than ideal at 68 3/4. My ignorant, but gradually becoming less so, mind tells me I need something like a 4x-14x or stronger optic for my old eyes. And a free floating handguard sounds like the way to go. And so long as it covers most of the barrel that's ok too. Best buttstock recommendations? And any makes of rifle to focus on and/or avoid?
I'll look at PSA and I like Springfield Armory and POF although I don't know why. Thank you all again for patience and a ton of good input.
I only started shooting a little while ago (10 years now, but I live in the south now where people start shooting in diapers). My knowledge is pretty limited. I have been given a lot of advice on how to build an AR. I chose the .223 wylde so I could shoot anything. I'm cheap. I'd rather shoot .223 than .556 just based on cost. I shot remanufactured 55gr crap .223 ammo at my first KD and qualified. (And then I couldn't qualify again at the next 3 years of KDs for some reason.) Patient coaching has finally brought me back to qualifying. Now my gucci friends are convincing me to shoot 77gr .556 stuff. I do shoot better with it.
I live in a state that allows adjustable stocks and I'd go with them always. I'm 5'4" and my kids are 6'1" and 6'3". T-rex and orangutan arms can use the same rifle.
Get the scope.
I go with Wylde and also a 1:8 twist rate - not a 1:7. The 1:8 is good even with heavier bullets like 75gr. Better actually. I'm not going to debate why either. And a 16in barrel is fine for distances. To me 18 & 20 is too long and gets in the way for things other than Appleseed. Plus long barrels are heavier if you ever have to go long distances carrying it.
I have a few fixed stock AR-pattern rifles and they work fine for me. KE Arms makes a monolithic polymer lower that is both lightweight and an amazing value - you effectively get lower receiver, stock, and grip for the price of a typical aluminum lower. I hate the M4-style stock (they keep wanting to pinch my beard hairs) so it's either fixed stock or something like a Magpul UBR for me.
LDB415, regarding your comments about old eyes, quality of the optic counts at least as much as magnification. A small target that's clear in your scope is preferable to a big blurry one. Too much magnification can be a hindrance to good shooting. I found this out at my last class. I was dialed to about 7x for prone shooting. ITB came around and told all of us we didn't need that much magnification and to try shooting at 4x. I did and my next AQT was the best target I ever shot. I found that at 7x, I really noticed my self-induced wobble, and it made me want to try to time my shots, which in turn was leading to bad trigger technique. At 4x, I noticed my wobble less, so it was easier to focus on shooting the way Appleseed actually teaches us to shoot.
Quote from: UpACreek on January 02, 2026, 12:10:57 PMI only started shooting a little while ago (10 years now, but I live in the south now where people start shooting in diapers).
Love it! :)
By the way, I too now live in the south.
Quote from: LDB415 on January 02, 2026, 11:52:57 AMI'll admit up front. My goal is fun. I do all of this just because I enjoy it. Learning, which I'll do a lot of in Appleseed, is a nice bonus to the goal of I enjoy it. I'm not interested in being the next SWAT guy so I don't need stuff attached to my rifle. I can see a bipod maybe, but not really anything else. So I want to make the best choices for just most accurate shooting and least recoil while doing so.
It sounds like the 5.56x45 is the way to go. That if .223 ammo is used it might lose a small amount of accuracy while the bullet jumps the gap to the barrel but is safe where the other way could mean pressure and safety issues. So I'll shop for a 5.56 rifle.
I know some guys can see and shoot 400 yards, and farther, without optical aid. And some have talked about 4x and 2x-7x scopes, but all that seems far less than ideal at 68 3/4. My ignorant, but gradually becoming less so, mind tells me I need something like a 4x-14x or stronger optic for my old eyes. And a free floating handguard sounds like the way to go. And so long as it covers most of the barrel that's ok too. Best buttstock recommendations? And any makes of rifle to focus on and/or avoid?
Lot of good information here, lot of good advice and solid opinions.
The rifles I use for KDs are my ARs that are set up for service rifle: one with open sights and one with a 4x scope. As a member of the 'limited funds' crowd, I didn't buy them both at the same time. Over time I managed to acquire a couple of good ones and now my open sight AR is my backup rifle. It is true that For Appleseed KD shooting, you really don't need a rifle capable of sub-MOA accuracy. In Service rifle you do if you want to be competitive at the highest levels and that's why I went with those choices.
That said, when we in Appleseed say you need a rifle capable of 4 MOA accuracy that means both you and the rifle as a shooting system (prone, in the sling) need to be able to meet the 4 MOA accuracy requirement at 500 yards. But I don't think very many KDs are shot at 500 yard these days. I'm sure there are some, but, every KD that I've been to have only shot out to 400 yards.
The 5.56 or .223 Wylde are fine chamber choices. My Rock River Service rifle upper has a .223 Wylde chamber and it handles 5.56 just fine. Was shooting it just last week and even with M855 ammo I was getting 1.5 MOA groups. Yep, this dyed in the wool reloader bought a box of factory ammo! :)
For what it's worth, I have fixed stocks on the Service Rifles.
The eyes. I have commented elsewhere on the forums about how I got a new pair of glasses in 2024. During the exam I had a chat with my optometrist about how I shoot a lot (with different rifles and pistols) and need to be able to focus on the front sight that is about 19 to 30 inches out in front of my dominant eye. She understood completely and whipped up a prescription that is amazing. Keep that in mind when thinking about open sights. For what it's worth I have eyes that have seen 62 trips around the sun.
Consider your buttstock dimensions and mounting optics. With the stock, make sure that when you get your cheekweld you're looking directly into the center of the ocular lens of the scope. As for the optic, you'll need an AR with a scope base (usually a cantilever style) that allows you to correctly mount the scope far enough forward so that when you get a good turkey neck and cheekweld, you will have a nice, full field of view in the scope (no scope shadow).
As you said, I too am in this for fun as well. Really like the program.
You ask good questions and you'll get a lot of answers that have real merit. In the end, it's about sifting through all the responses to find something that works for you.
In Liberty,
Gus
Quote from: LDB415 on January 02, 2026, 11:52:57 AMI know some guys can see and shoot 400 yards, and farther, without optical aid. And some have talked about 4x and 2x-7x scopes, but all that seems far less than ideal at 68 3/4. My ignorant, but gradually becoming less so, mind tells me I need something like a 4x-14x or stronger optic for my old eyes.
Quote from: Gus on January 02, 2026, 02:39:02 PMAs for the optic, you'll need an AR with a scope base (usually a cantilever style) that allows you to correctly mount the scope far enough forward so that when you get a good turkey neck and cheekweld, you will have a nice, full field of view in the scope (no scope shadow).
Excellent advice!
To emphasize: if you're ever doubtful that your scope is properly installed on your AR, just bring your nose to the charging handle (preferably while in the prone position), place the full weight of your head onto the stock, and check to see if you have sight alignment, with your eye centered in the eyebox. If you don't, then adjust/reconfigure your scope mount (not your head!) until you do. To adapt this procedure for standing position (e.g. you live in an urban shoebox where you can't go prone), instead of making your eye centered in the eyebox, make your eye centered at the rear of the eyebox, such that the slightest disengagement with the charging handle will cause a vignette.
Isn't MOA the same regardless of distance? I mean the concept, not the actual measure? Based on 100yds I think. So at 100yds 4MOA would be a 4" circle where at 50yds it would be a 2" circle and at 400yds a 16" circle? Or am I completely confused and lost as usual? :)
Quote from: LDB415 on January 02, 2026, 03:02:06 PMIsn't MOA the same regardless of distance? I mean the concept, not the actual measure? Based on 100yds I think. So at 100yds 4MOA would be a 4" circle where at 50yds it would be a 2" circle and at 400yds a 16" circle? Or am I completely confused and lost as usual? :)
You are correct. People will often include a distance and level of accuracy to describe a certain level of capability because different cartridges perform differently at different distances. Some rounds resist wind deflection better than others, and different loadings will transition from supersonic to subsonic at different distances. An AR15 that shoots 1 MOA (4 inches) at 400 yards will not shoot a 10 inch group at 1000 yards.
Quote from: LDB415 on January 02, 2026, 11:52:57 AMI'll admit up front. My goal is fun. I do all of this just because I enjoy it. Learning, which I'll do a lot of in Appleseed, is a nice bonus to the goal of I enjoy it. I'm not interested in being the next SWAT guy so I don't need stuff attached to my rifle. I can see a bipod maybe, but not really anything else. So I want to make the best choices for just most accurate shooting and least recoil while doing so.
It sounds like the 5.56x45 is the way to go. That if .223 ammo is used it might lose a small amount of accuracy while the bullet jumps the gap to the barrel but is safe where the other way could mean pressure and safety issues. So I'll shop for a 5.56 rifle.
I know some guys can see and shoot 400 yards, and farther, without optical aid. And some have talked about 4x and 2x-7x scopes, but all that seems far less than ideal at 68 3/4. My ignorant, but gradually becoming less so, mind tells me I need something like a 4x-14x or stronger optic for my old eyes. And a free floating handguard sounds like the way to go. And so long as it covers most of the barrel that's ok too. Best buttstock recommendations? And any makes of rifle to focus on and/or avoid?
I'll look at PSA and I like Springfield Armory and POF although I don't know why. Thank you all again for patience and a ton of good input.
Sir, you have more years than I had thought. There are two extremes on optics. The first is too much magnification, seeing too well. This leads to fussing the shot where you start fighting yourself. On the other hand, is less than perfect eyesight struggling with using irons.
The reason I suggested the irons is because it, moreso than scopes, teaches Battle Sight Zero and the idea of effective come ups. For instance, the front post on the M2 system is just wide enough to match the MOA of a torso sized target at your maximum BSZ. If the target is narrower than the front sight, you need to add elevation. This helps get the fundamentals ingrained.
However, if the sights are not good enough for less than perfect eyes, then struggling will happen. We encourage scope shooters to shoot at minimum magnification to avoid over-focusing on wobble and fussing the shot. I will say that one, if one's eyesight struggles, should shoot at the minimum at which they can comfortably see the target without struggling. Remember step 4 of the six steps, the eye is on the front post or the crosshairs. The target is supposed to be blurry. As long as you can see the blurry target and can aim at it, that is correct.
Fortunately, the AR system, if one uses a railed sight on the front, and a removable carry handle rear sight assembly, will allow a scope and a different comb height stock easily as your needs dictate.
I definitely have a LOT to learn but thankfully at least some time remaining in which to do it. As much as I like the looks of the fixed stock longer barrel I think the more sensible thing is to get a 16" flat top and put an appropriate scope on it. And I'm changing my thinking from needing one of the new fangled 20-50x56 or whatever scopes for 400 yards to more like 4-14 by 4x or 50. And trying to further convince myself the Leupold VX-III 3.5-10x40 I have on my .22 Hornet is a good idea and get a new scope for it.
Speaking of scopes, what about parallax adjustment? I'm sort of looking into scopes for my ordered 10/22 and the 25M Appleseed. So many are set to 100 yard parallax with a few set at a fixed 50 or 30 and a few more adjustable. But wouldn't adjustable also be good shooting a 400 yard KD rather than one frozen at 100 yard setting?
Adjustable parallax is helpful if you're using progressive or bifocal lenses. Otherwise, you can avoid parallax error by bringing your eye to the same place in the eyebox every time. The "nose to the charging handle" setup on an AR-15 is an excellent way to make this easy.
Quote from: mmirate on January 02, 2026, 05:11:54 PMAdjustable parallax is helpful if you're using progressive or bifocal lenses. Otherwise, you can avoid parallax error by bringing your eye to the same place in the eyebox every time. The "nose to the charging handle" setup on an AR-15 is an excellent way to make this easy.
I have been using a "lens reducer" to help assure a consistent sight alignment. You can buy one from White Oak Armament (for some scopes) or make your own. It's simply a disc of clear plexiglass with a small central hole and is held in place with a flip up scope cap. For me at least, it reduced group sizes significantly and cost very little. (I made my own.) If the crosshairs are centered in the aperture, your eye position will be consistent (sight alignment) and it forces a repeatable cheek weld helping to eliminate parallax. FWIW, I also use and recommend a nose to the charging handle for maximum consistency.
So people are saying the nose should be touching the charging handle? Wouldn't that lead to a "poke in the nose" every time a round is fired? Better than a "poke in the eye" by the scope like we see in some blooper videos I guess but still.
Quote from: LDB415 on January 09, 2026, 10:00:40 AMSo people are saying the nose should be touching the charging handle? Wouldn't that lead to a "poke in the nose" every time a round is fired? Better than a "poke in the eye" by the scope like we see in some blooper videos I guess but still.
No, because the charging handle on an AR-15 does not reciprocate with each shot. (And because you're pulling the buttstock smartly into your shoulder so that it cannot travel any further back under recoil.)
There is a LOT to absorb and get used to in this rifle business. Blissful ignorance is much easier. :)