.22 Caliber AR-15 Rifles Are Nowhere Near Ideal For New Appleseeders.

[yellowhousejake]

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.   

YHJ

[Dude]

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.

[Mackey Morgan]

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?

[oladcock]

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.

[Mackey Morgan]

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!

[oladcock]

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.

[Prometheus Youngblood]

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!!!

[Prometheus Youngblood]

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!!!

[malabar]

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

[Ringer68]

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.

[Roland]

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.

[oladcock]

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.

[Brad76]

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

[Mackey Morgan]

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!

[oladcock]

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.