Non Scientific Ammo Testing Part 2

[Iraqgunz]

Here are the remaining targets as well as some conclusions on my part.

1. We were shooting in less than ideal conditions and were still able to place all of the shots on paper and almost all of them within the cricle.

2. We placed the targets over our torsos at the end and one can easily see that all of the hits would have been to the area above the beltline and below the neck.

3. None of the weapons or ammo experienced any malfunctions.

4. IMO the accuracy displayed was more than accurate enough to kill someone if it was necessary. The accuracy was more than enough to conduct training. Obviously the PP Match ammo was the better performer and probably more lethal than the M193 clone ammo.

6145

6146

6147

6148

6149

[chadbag]

Actually the RUAG stuff looks pretty good as well. None of it looks bad.

[Pappabear]

I have very similar experience yesterday. I shot some Hornady TAP, which produced a very respectable group much like your Match ammo. And shot some Green box UMC Rem 55grain for acceptable groups.

My other observation (which has been covered at length on M4C) was my 50 yard zero was a little left at 100, so I tweaked that. Also, My 193 shot about 12 inches higher than my TAP with a pretty wide spread, still center mass with RDS if zeroed for 193.

I was at the range to test out my LMT MWS and doing this to let my barrel cool, but had the same- "this would have got the job done result".

I was shooting 16 inch LMT SOPMOD with Battlecomp and Aimpoint RDS.

[markm]

The RUAG is good quality ammo, but the groups just seem to open up a little compared to the rest whenever we try to get it on paper.