500grains
12-29-10, 10:08
I went to the desert to shoot yesterday with a friend and my two kids. On site were:
o Noveske 14.5 CAR MOE Vortex FH with Eotech on Larue mount
o Noveske 14.5 CAR MOE Vortex FH with Aimpoint M3 on Larue mount
o Daniel Defense 14.5 CHF pencil barrel upper built by G&R Tactical Vortex FH MOE on C3 billet lower MOE with Eotech and Eotech 4x magnifier on Larue mount
o Daniel Defense 16 CHF pencil barrel upper built by G&R Tactical Vortex FH MOE on TDI billet lower MOE with Eotech on Larue mount
o Daniel Defense 16 CHF pencil barrel upper with DD light rail assembled by G&R Vortex FH on C3 billet lower MOE with ACOG RCO on Larue mount
All triggers for the above were standard military.
Also present was a Novske N4 CHF CL 10.5 upper with Troy drop in rail on a a registered lower.
The weather started out at 25 degrees F. with freezing fog. Then it dropped 5 degrees and got breezy, still with the freezing fog. It was definitely chilly.
We shot a full size AR500 steel ipsc target, a half size ar500 steel ipsc target, a 12 inch AR600 disc, and 5 manhole covers (which are a bitch to move around). Distances were 50 yards down to 3 yards.
Regarding 3 yards, I wanted to test out the 1/2 size ipsc target, which is on a 30 degree angle for close shots with handguns, for close shots with an ar-15. As close as 3 yards using XM193 I had no problems with anything bouncing back from that angled target, although I can't be certain it would never happen. The close shots leave very small pock marks in the AR500 steel.
Reliability: About 1100 rounds fired total. All rifles listed above with 14.5 or longer barrels performed flawlessly, with one exception. None of the rilfes would feed from several Imperial Defense magazines that I have. With PMAGS, C Products mags, and regular milspec mags, these guns were all perfect, however. I am seriously thinking of throwing out everything except PMAGs and those HK AR15 mags which cost 50 bucks each.
The Noveske 10.5 on registered lower did not run very well. Sometimes it would only go for a couple of shots and sometimes it would run half a mag. The lower had an H bufffer which is probably too light, so I suspect bolt bounce. So I think it needs an H2 or H3 buffer, and some experimentation will be needed to find out which. If anyone has a bit of insight on this, please give me some pointers.
Angled Stance vs. Squared Up Stance: I shot a lot of rounds with the pencil barreled guns and the Noveske with Eotech in a regular 45 degree stance and in the squared up stance taught by magpul and others. Personally I find the 45 degree stance more natural and quicker to fall into. But for rapid follow up shots, the squared up stance seemed to be much better at controlling muzzle rise, especially with the light guns.
Shooting while moving: In order to minimize rifle bounce I found that if I tightened my stomach and butt and then tried to float my hips across the ground, that was best to minimize the up and down bounce of the rifle while moving. It was also evident that the heavier guns are a bit easier to keep steady when shooting on the move.
Barrel length: Barrel length made no difference in this shoot.
Optic Impressions: I like the Eotech for rapid target acquisition and for shooting on the move. For a stationary shot which is beyond 20 yards, the ACOG rocks. The Aimpoint was fine but I just like the circle reticle of the Eotech a bit better.
VFG: The VFGs were MOE except for the one on the Daniel Defense Lite rail which was a Larue with the shortest extension in it. Both served equally well.
Left handed: I think I need about 500,000 rounds of left handed practice before I can claim moderate proficiency with my weak side.
Sorry, I did not attempt to record the event in pictures.
o Noveske 14.5 CAR MOE Vortex FH with Eotech on Larue mount
o Noveske 14.5 CAR MOE Vortex FH with Aimpoint M3 on Larue mount
o Daniel Defense 14.5 CHF pencil barrel upper built by G&R Tactical Vortex FH MOE on C3 billet lower MOE with Eotech and Eotech 4x magnifier on Larue mount
o Daniel Defense 16 CHF pencil barrel upper built by G&R Tactical Vortex FH MOE on TDI billet lower MOE with Eotech on Larue mount
o Daniel Defense 16 CHF pencil barrel upper with DD light rail assembled by G&R Vortex FH on C3 billet lower MOE with ACOG RCO on Larue mount
All triggers for the above were standard military.
Also present was a Novske N4 CHF CL 10.5 upper with Troy drop in rail on a a registered lower.
The weather started out at 25 degrees F. with freezing fog. Then it dropped 5 degrees and got breezy, still with the freezing fog. It was definitely chilly.
We shot a full size AR500 steel ipsc target, a half size ar500 steel ipsc target, a 12 inch AR600 disc, and 5 manhole covers (which are a bitch to move around). Distances were 50 yards down to 3 yards.
Regarding 3 yards, I wanted to test out the 1/2 size ipsc target, which is on a 30 degree angle for close shots with handguns, for close shots with an ar-15. As close as 3 yards using XM193 I had no problems with anything bouncing back from that angled target, although I can't be certain it would never happen. The close shots leave very small pock marks in the AR500 steel.
Reliability: About 1100 rounds fired total. All rifles listed above with 14.5 or longer barrels performed flawlessly, with one exception. None of the rilfes would feed from several Imperial Defense magazines that I have. With PMAGS, C Products mags, and regular milspec mags, these guns were all perfect, however. I am seriously thinking of throwing out everything except PMAGs and those HK AR15 mags which cost 50 bucks each.
The Noveske 10.5 on registered lower did not run very well. Sometimes it would only go for a couple of shots and sometimes it would run half a mag. The lower had an H bufffer which is probably too light, so I suspect bolt bounce. So I think it needs an H2 or H3 buffer, and some experimentation will be needed to find out which. If anyone has a bit of insight on this, please give me some pointers.
Angled Stance vs. Squared Up Stance: I shot a lot of rounds with the pencil barreled guns and the Noveske with Eotech in a regular 45 degree stance and in the squared up stance taught by magpul and others. Personally I find the 45 degree stance more natural and quicker to fall into. But for rapid follow up shots, the squared up stance seemed to be much better at controlling muzzle rise, especially with the light guns.
Shooting while moving: In order to minimize rifle bounce I found that if I tightened my stomach and butt and then tried to float my hips across the ground, that was best to minimize the up and down bounce of the rifle while moving. It was also evident that the heavier guns are a bit easier to keep steady when shooting on the move.
Barrel length: Barrel length made no difference in this shoot.
Optic Impressions: I like the Eotech for rapid target acquisition and for shooting on the move. For a stationary shot which is beyond 20 yards, the ACOG rocks. The Aimpoint was fine but I just like the circle reticle of the Eotech a bit better.
VFG: The VFGs were MOE except for the one on the Daniel Defense Lite rail which was a Larue with the shortest extension in it. Both served equally well.
Left handed: I think I need about 500,000 rounds of left handed practice before I can claim moderate proficiency with my weak side.
Sorry, I did not attempt to record the event in pictures.