Jeff Gurwitch and The Competition-to-Combat Crossover, Part 3

[GarandThumb]

I've always been interested to hear from Jeff Gurwitch and his experiences while deployed. It's interesting to see how guys are setting up their rifles "over there". There was a fairly spirited discussion on his part 2 series so I thought it would be interesting to hear more discussion on his newest entry.

http://www.defensereview.com/tactica...over-part-iii/

[nml]

He's cool. I had only ever read the first one so thanks for the heads up.

[Ned Christiansen]

This ought to be great-- searching for the first two parts to read first, in case I don't find them, got any links?

Found them! Edit-- part 1:
http://www.defensereview.com/tactica...bat-crossover/

Part 2:

http://www.defensereview.com/tactica...sover-part-ii/

[GarandThumb]

What surprises me most is that the Elcan spectre and eotech are still used with such frequency. You hardly ever see aimpoint micro's

[Ned Christiansen]

Indeed it was good reading. Of course, when I got to part 3 I found links to 1 and 2... :-)

I sure didn't know guys had so much latitude in rifle set-up. Some more than others I'm sure and depending on "who's looking".

[bigwagon]

I sure didn't know guys had so much latitude in rifle set-up. Some more than others I'm sure and depending on "who's looking".

If there internet had been around during WWII, I wonder how many "How I set up my Garand" posts there would have been?

[USMC_Anglico]

Elcans and Eotechs are "in the system", not so much for Aimpoint micro's. CCO's are available too. Most guys want some magnification and the Elcan provides that, sub-optimally IMHO. I've run CCO with 3x magnifier, S&B 1-4 shortdot. Next time around I'm thinking a 1-6 or 1-8.

Modifications that don't alter the innards such as grip, stocks, slings, etc. are GTG. Our philosophy is it has to be quality components (Magpul, BCM, Blue Force, etc.) and has to be reversible to as issued condition (you have to have all the USGI parts to put back on when turned in). Once you get to rails, triggers, etc. that's where it gets touchy. Although with the latest SOPMOD, those components are pretty much GTG (extended FSB rail, Geiselle trigger, etc.)

Can't speak as to the lack of BUIS, I know there is a line of thought that it's become redundant with the reliability of optics these days. Me personally, I'll take the weight and rail space hit and run BUIS.

[SteveL]

Interesting read. Thanks for posting.

[jpmuscle]

Elcans and Eotechs are "in the system", not so much for Aimpoint micro's. CCO's are available too. Most guys want some magnification and the Elcan provides that, sub-optimally IMHO. I've run CCO with 3x magnifier, S&B 1-4 shortdot. Next time around I'm thinking a 1-6 or 1-8.

Modifications that don't alter the innards such as grip, stocks, slings, etc. are GTG. Our philosophy is it has to be quality components (Magpul, BCM, Blue Force, etc.) and has to be reversible to as issued condition (you have to have all the USGI parts to put back on when turned in). Once you get to rails, triggers, etc. that's where it gets touchy. Although with the latest SOPMOD, those components are pretty much GTG (extended FSB rail, Geiselle trigger, etc.)

Can't speak as to the lack of BUIS, I know there is a line of thought that it's become redundant with the reliability of optics these days. Me personally, I'll take the weight and rail space hit and run BUIS.

Do you think the no BUIS needed line of thinking is more prevalent in the gun oriented users or the less gun enthusiast user with respect to .MIL fielding? I'd assume the latter but I'm just spit balling.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

[MistWolf]

Just spitballing myself, but the guys not using BUIS are probably in the same category of WWII GIs who ditched their gas masks to rid themselves of the weight of an uneeded item