View Full Version : Who says Wolf isn't accurate?
Well I do, for one. But this isn't bad at all for $5.00 a box. It was my best group. My last (and worst) group was probably a little less than twice as big. Also shot 2 Remington 55 grain FMJs that i had rollin around in my ammo can, just to see what I could group with some halfway decent ammo. I'm impressed and I think if I get some good quality ammo, or handloads, I could bring the grouping in tighter. The guy at the range says that lane is 150 yards, but I don't think it is. It doesn't seem more than 120, but who knows. Oh yea, this was with my DPMS/Model1Sales 24" Tactical AR-15 with 10-40x scope.
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m184/rangeranger44/SANY0191.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m184/rangeranger44/SANY0194.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m184/rangeranger44/SANY0193.jpg
[IMG]http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m184/rangeranger44/SANY0195.jpg[/IMG
I believe in Wolf...
This is 40 rounds of Wolf Military Classic (55gr FMJ) at 100 yards.
http://homepage.mac.com/kevinfarrell/.Pictures/10Nov08%20Range%20Day/DSCN0011.JPG
This is the weapon...
An out-of-the-box standard Bushmaster M4A3 wearing a Mueller 8.5-25x44 AO Tactical scope on Warne QD extra tall rings.
http://homepage.mac.com/kevinfarrell/.Pictures/10Nov08%20Range%20Day/DSCN0002.JPG
Are those 1" squares on that grid?
Geez. With that scope and that rifle rest, you'd expect even bad ammo to hold 3 MOA.
:confused:
Are those 1" squares on that grid?
Geez. With that scope and that rifle rest, you'd expect even bad ammo to hold 3 MOA.
:confused:
Okay...
Fair enough.
Let me see you do better with the same kit. ;)
RogerinTPA
01-23-09, 20:51
Mega,
With that ammo and the amount fired, it's a respectable group. Some guys shoot too fracking fast and say the ammo or weapon is shit. Try shooting 1 round per minute or 2, controlling your breathing, watch your trigger control and don't shoot unless the shot is perfect. I bet you can cut that group in half. It's all about patients. ;)
With that ammo and the amount fired, it's a respectable group. Some guys shoot too fracking fast and say the ammo or weapon is shit. Try shooting 1 round per minute or 2, controlling your breathing, watch your trigger control and don't shoot unless the shot is perfect. I bet you can cut that group in half. ;)
Thanks.
That is my goal. ;)
I'd like to move all of my rounds into the 2x2 square.
You just need to be lucky that one of the steel cases doesn't weld in your receiver. Ask me how I know. Other than that it's great ammo.
ICANHITHIMMAN
01-24-09, 08:34
I have heard a lot of bad rap for the WOLF and its not true. I have been shooting it for years with out a hitch. It runs fine and shoots MOA. I once ran my rifle for 2500 rds strait with wolf and no cleaning just to see how long it would run to failur. I just put clp on the bolt when It got slow. It did stop at around 2500 and I was cleaning for weeks.
Littlelebowski
01-24-09, 08:58
You just need to be lucky that one of the steel cases doesn't weld in your receiver. Ask me how I know. Other than that it's great ammo.
You mean lacquer buildup.
Sorry to jump in with this being my first post , but Ive been shooting wolf for over 10 years and NEVER hand any problems, ever.
You always hear guys say " Im not shooting that shit ammo in my AR, only the best brass for me".
Screw that, to me if your AR cant use the so called ''shit '' ammo, then why have it, I want my gun to shoot everything, not just top shelf.
Littlelebowski
01-24-09, 09:26
+1, Merc. Great first post. Ain't no room in my safe for "fine boned," "delicate" rifles.
Failure2Stop
01-24-09, 09:58
Here's my input-
1- Ammunition accuracy testing should be performed with 10 shot groups. If you are worried about heating your barrel up too much with 10 shot groups, a series of 5 shot groups can be substituted (as per FBI testing).
Shoot the same test with 10 shot groups (if the gun is benched you don't get to discount fliers). I guarantee you will see a big difference.
2- The words "DPMS", "Model1Sales", and "Tactical" should never be strung together in a sentence unless the word "not" is included somewhere.
There is nothing wrong with cheapo practice ammo. But match grade it is not, and definately not in depth, accross the spectrum of lot #s.
I don't mean to piss in your Cheerios or kick your puppy, but this type of accuracy "testing" is simply wrong. If you happen to prove me wrong and can shoot numerous 10 shot groups of the same size as your 3 shot groups I will happily bound out and buy every bit of Wolf I can find. But I am not counting on that happening.
Robb Jensen
01-24-09, 10:03
I typically don't find Wolf to be very inaccurate, but I do find it to be very weak. It won't even completely cycle my 10" and 12" SBRs unless I have the suppressor mounted.
Here's my input-
1- Ammunition accuracy testing should be performed with 10 shot groups. If you are worried about heating your barrel up too much with 10 shot groups, a series of 5 shot groups can be substituted (as per FBI testing).
Shoot the same test with 10 shot groups (if the gun is benched you don't get to discount fliers). I guarantee you will see a big difference.
2- The words "DPMS", "Model1Sales", and "Tactical" should never be strung together in a sentence unless the word "not" is included somewhere.
There is nothing wrong with cheapo practice ammo. But match grade it is not, and definately not in depth, accross the spectrum of lot #s.
I don't mean to piss in your Cheerios or kick your puppy, but this type of accuracy "testing" is simply wrong. If you happen to prove me wrong and can shoot numerous 10 shot groups of the same size as your 3 shot groups I will happily bound out and buy every bit of Wolf I can find. But I am not counting on that happening.
Did I say Wolf is the end-all for accurate ammo? Did I say it was anywhere near match-grade? No, I did not. I was stating the fact, that the groups I was shooting, were damn good groups for Wolf. What's wrong with 3 shot groups? If I can put 3 shots within a couple inches of each other, I'm happy. So moving on, my DPMS/Model1 "Tactical" is a DPMS lower, with a M1S Tactical 24" upper. That's the model name for the upper, they also have a 24" Varmint upper. I'm well aware of what "tactical" means. I mess with "tactical" gear almost every day at work. And hell, if I feel like calling my 10/22 "tactical", I'll do it.
if I feel like calling my 10/22 "tactical", I'll do it.
I'm with you brother! :D
http://homepage.mac.com/kevinfarrell/.Pictures/Nordic%20mock-up/Nordic001.jpg
Failure2Stop
01-24-09, 10:38
Did I say Wolf is the end-all for accurate ammo? Did I say it was anywhere near match-grade? No, I did not. I was stating the fact, that the groups I was shooting, were damn good groups for Wolf. What's wrong with 3 shot groups? If I can put 3 shots within a couple inches of each other, I'm happy. So moving on, my DPMS/Model1 "Tactical" is a DPMS lower, with a M1S Tactical 24" upper. That's the model name for the upper, they also have a 24" Varmint upper. I'm well aware of what "tactical" means. I mess with "tactical" gear almost every day at work. And hell, if I feel like calling my 10/22 "tactical", I'll do it.
Ok, guess we'll go at it the hard way :rolleyes:.
Never said you claimed it was the end-all accurate, but when you start a thread with a title of "Who says Wolf isn't accurate?" and pictures of quarters and three shot groups, it clearly is supposed to be some kind of proof of ability.
As I said, there is nothing wrong with plinking/training ammo. I use M193 when I have to pay for my training ammo. It sure as hell isn't going to win any precision competitions. Wolf falls in the same category, and there is nothing at all wrong with that, as long as the user has realisitc expectations and needs.
The practice of 3-shot groups as a zeroing method is fine, but when it comes to verification of zero or when discussing the accuracy potential of a weapon/ammo combination a 10 shot group is the way to go, unless you are dealing with high precision rigs, in which case several 5 shot groups are to be overlaid.
I understand that "Tactical" is the designation from the company, my remark was what I have heard called a "joke" in some circles. Grunts with thin skin, what is the world coming to? (That is also a joke). And sure, you can call whatever you want "Tactical", happens all the time and makes no real difference. Paint it black and cover it in velcro and it's instantly "Tactical". I am suprised that there aren't "Tactical" tampons on shelves at an Extreme Steve's near you right now. But there is also nothing wrong with avoiding the sillyness when unnecessary.
But hey, feel free to post what you want on an open forum, but don't be suprised when someone pops in to let you know that you are making claims that your testing fails to support.
Have a meritorious day.
Ok, guess we'll go at it the hard way
Sounds good to me.
I wasn't making any claims. If you'll read the first line in my first post, you'll see where I stand on Wolfs "accuracy". Since you obviously can't see that I'm not advocating the ammo, I'll break it down barney style. I shoot Wolf because it's the cheapest(well it used to be) ammo to feed my ARs and AKs. I thought this was a damn good group for Wolf. I wasn't testing my rifle or the ammo for accuracy. I was shooting. Nothing more, nothing less. It just so happens that when I shoot with that gun, I shoot 3 shots per bullseye. Is this the "proper etiquette" for testing accuracy? I don't know and don't really care. I'm not out to win any medals or set world records. I just love to shoot.
Oh and about the tactical "joke". Hilarious brother. Ha. Ha. And because I replied back to your first post, I have thin skin? I guess you must be used to people agreeing with everything you say and never talking back. Well thats not what us "grunts" do. If somethings out-of-whack, we handle it.
I'm with you brother! :D
http://homepage.mac.com/kevinfarrell/.Pictures/Nordic%20mock-up/Nordic001.jpg
It took me a second to catch that. I was wondering what that had to with a tactical 10/22. That is one sweet build.
Littlelebowski
01-24-09, 11:16
Way, way too serious, FTS. Dude was just posting some very decent 3 shot groups with el cheapo ammo and this turns into a sermon on "tactical" gear and how we should only test for accuracy with 10 shot groups (something I agree with). Can't we just say "hey Wolf is more accurate than most folks think" and not turn this into a diatribe?
Sincerely,
Another thin skinned 03 :D
Failure2Stop
01-24-09, 13:58
Way, way too serious, FTS. Dude was just posting some very decent 3 shot groups with el cheapo ammo and this turns into a sermon on "tactical" gear and how we should only test for accuracy with 10 shot groups (something I agree with). Can't we just say "hey Wolf is more accurate than most folks think" and not turn this into a diatribe?
Yup. Was trying to give a little advice on accuracy standard, but I agree that my second post was a bit knee-jerk. Did not at all mean it to turn into a dissertation about the "T" word.
I wasn't making any claims. If you'll read the first line in my first post, you'll see where I stand on Wolfs "accuracy". Since you obviously can't see that I'm not advocating the ammo, I'll break it down barney style. I shoot Wolf because it's the cheapest(well it used to be) ammo to feed my ARs and AKs. I thought this was a damn good group for Wolf. I wasn't testing my rifle or the ammo for accuracy. I was shooting. Nothing more, nothing less. It just so happens that when I shoot with that gun, I shoot 3 shots per bullseye. Is this the "proper etiquette" for testing accuracy? I don't know and don't really care. I'm not out to win any medals or set world records. I just love to shoot.
I'm not here to pull armchair commando on anybody or make shooting a misery. Loving to shoot is a good thing, and hopefully the unifying bond on this forum. Likewise, my intent was simply to provide information in the event that the actual potential of the combination is ever desired. It isn't about etiquette, it's about statistical average and data gathering. I am not an accuracy "snob", if a combination shoots 3 MOA I am perfectly happy for 90% of my use. Most rack-grade M4s are 3 MOA guns, maybe 2 MOA if fed Mk262.
I guess you must be used to people agreeing with everything you say and never talking back. Well thats not what us "grunts" do. If somethings out-of-whack, we handle it.
That's what I'm doing ;).
If I got too in depth, fair enough, but I did not make any ridiculous, off the wall statements. I am happy to take this to PM, if you wish, to avoid clutter.
ETA-
Oh and about the tactical "joke". Hilarious brother. Ha. Ha.
Fair enough, apologies for insulting your gun. Sometimes I forget that some people are as touchy about their weapons as they are about their wives.
Did I say Wolf is the end-all for accurate ammo? Did I say it was anywhere near match-grade? No, I did not. I was stating the fact, that the groups I was shooting, were damn good groups for Wolf. What's wrong with 3 shot groups? If I can put 3 shots within a couple inches of each other, I'm happy. So moving on, my DPMS/Model1 "Tactical" is a DPMS lower, with a M1S Tactical 24" upper. That's the model name for the upper, they also have a 24" Varmint upper. I'm well aware of what "tactical" means. I mess with "tactical" gear almost every day at work. And hell, if I feel like calling my 10/22 "tactical", I'll do it.
I agree. It seems like M4 Carbine is going the way of AR15.com (TOS) Someone makes a comment about some thing they are doing or testing, someone else doesn't agree and they just shit on their comments.
Come on guys don't let this site go the way of TOS. Lets try a little more respect and keep the comments useful
Until that day
Darkop
I typically don't find Wolf to be very inaccurate, but I do find it to be very weak. It won't even completely cycle my 10" and 12" SBRs unless I have the suppressor mounted.
that's cause you got them H14 buffers in there. :)
Fair enough, apologies for insulting your gun. Sometimes I forget that some people are as touchy about their weapons as they are about their wives.
Not a problem man. I know my setup is as cheap as they come. And I'm fine with that. It's not some sniper rifle that I take on deployment to protect myself or others, It's just something I have fun with and take out the occasional hog with. I have put my time and money(not much obviously with DPMS and M1S) in it to make it exactly what I want. But no hard feelings either way.
It took me a second to catch that. I was wondering what that had to with a tactical 10/22. That is one sweet build.
Thanks. :)
That rifle is a Nordic AR22 with a very heavily modified Ruger 10/22 action.
This particular rifle is a build that started out mild, then went to wild.
I don't even want to go into what she cost to build... but it was not trivial. :eek:
Paint it black and cover it in velcro and it's instantly "Tactical". I am suprised that there aren't "Tactical" tampons on shelves at an Extreme Steve's near you right now.
LMFAO HAHAHAHA!!!!
Ok, guess we'll go at it the hard way :rolleyes:.
Never said you claimed it was the end-all accurate, but when you start a thread with a title of "Who says Wolf isn't accurate?" and pictures of quarters and three shot groups, it clearly is supposed to be some kind of proof of ability.
As I said, there is nothing wrong with plinking/training ammo. I use M193 when I have to pay for my training ammo. It sure as hell isn't going to win any precision competitions. Wolf falls in the same category, and there is nothing at all wrong with that, as long as the user has realisitc expectations and needs.
The practice of 3-shot groups as a zeroing method is fine, but when it comes to verification of zero or when discussing the accuracy potential of a weapon/ammo combination a 10 shot group is the way to go, unless you are dealing with high precision rigs, in which case several 5 shot groups are to be overlaid.
I understand that "Tactical" is the designation from the company, my remark was what I have heard called a "joke" in some circles. Grunts with thin skin, what is the world coming to? (That is also a joke). And sure, you can call whatever you want "Tactical", happens all the time and makes no real difference. Paint it black and cover it in velcro and it's instantly "Tactical". I am suprised that there aren't "Tactical" tampons on shelves at an Extreme Steve's near you right now. But there is also nothing wrong with avoiding the sillyness when unnecessary.
But hey, feel free to post what you want on an open forum, but don't be suprised when someone pops in to let you know that you are making claims that your testing fails to support.
Have a meritorious day.
3-shot groups?
Forget that. I shoot 1-shot groups. All of my rifles are under 1MOA with any ammo I feed them. Pistols too. :rolleyes:
Seriously, the OP said that he hand-picked a 3-shot group. It doesn't get any more NON indicative of system performance than that. +1 on your assessment. That is why I always shoot 10-shot groups. The OP was just piddling around and having a good, safe time it sounds like. Other than that, not much goin on.
*sigh* I guess I too will be un-popular as I have found no fault with your advice other than to say this. Advice is the only free thing that people never want.
--This Tactical Message brought to you by WS6--
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.