I tried the 90-degree bent arm thing to see where the stock falls. With the stock extended all the way out, I still have to bend my wrist sharply to grab the pistol grip. If I let my wrist fall naturally my palm is almost past the grip.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I tried the 90-degree bent arm thing to see where the stock falls. With the stock extended all the way out, I still have to bend my wrist sharply to grab the pistol grip. If I let my wrist fall naturally my palm is almost past the grip.
Last edited by FourT6and2; 11-09-14 at 12:13.
That is a starting point. When you shoulder the carbine with your head erect, you will know if the stock is adjusted to suit you. I shoot with the stock a little more inboard toward my head, so I don't have a tendency to cant the rifle. Other people I shoot with sometimes shoot with the buttstock placed farther out toward the shoulder. Raise and lower your firing arm elbow until you find your grip & trigger finger placement the most comfortable with the least amount of sight wobble.
Good luck and good shooting!
Train 2 Win
Because too many variables are present at only 10 yards, and requires the user to place the center of the group on a very specific point, with a degree of measurement accuracy that is not readily achieved when one could simply zero at the actual distance. Another significant factor is how one resolves the point of aim at distance. How a dot at 10 yards resolves is different than how it resolves to the user at distances past 50 yards.
Further, it generally forces the shooter to put the target very close to the ground when zeroing with a magazine monopod technique, something that a lot of range/targetry won't support.
There is also the issue of different ammunition and barrel lengths along with different offset distances between the bore and line of sight. Each of these is a factor, and one can avoid all of the issues by simply zeroing at the actual distance you are trying to replicate.
There is nothing that replaces shooting at actual distance for data.
Ballistic calculators can be close, but they are't perfect.
I make these statements from over 15 years of training, ,with several thousand students. I have participated, conducted, instructed, and given instruction on zeroing (at 25 meters, 36 yards, 50 yards and meters, 100 yards and meters, 200 yards, and 300 yards and meters), and I can wholly state that the long-range accuracy of one's zero is most consistently correct if one zeroes at 100 yards or further. This does not mean that one must have POI/POA at 100 yards/meters (for example, I like 2" high at 100 yards/meters for irons), simply that nailing down the actual zero at 100 yards/meters gives the user the highest probability of success.
I am not a fan of 25 yard "zeroing", as it has all of the issues I outlined, other than as a method of "getting on paper" for "real" zeroing at 50 or 100, and I see 10 yard zeroing as less preferable than the 25. If all you have is 10 or 25 yards, I get it, and it's better to do something than nothing, but I sincerely doubt that either Mr. Proctor or Mr. Hodnett would be happy with only a 10 yard zero with no correction at distance.
Every time I see F2S on the most recent posts, I know I'm going to get educated.
He's right. Firing at 10 or 25 or 36 yards to "get on paper" at 100+ yards is totally acceptable, and even expected.
Firing at 10 yards and expecting to be "zeroed" at 100+ is a fool's endeavor.
Why do the loudest do the least?
Concur. I have passed through the exact process he described multiple times. It works and it has many unforeseen benefits. I get on paper with solid groups at 36 and then stretch it out to 300. Not only is the zero much more solid and reliable, but it strengthens the fundamentals just to shoot at those distances. He gives bedrock solid info.
And in addition to being very knowledgable and experienced, F2S is modest. He's one of our resident Bad-Asses.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...he-Bronze-Star
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...Stop-on-KAC-TV
^^ Read with southern accent !^^ and blame all grammatical errors on Alabama's public school system.
Technique is nothing more than failed style. Cecil B DeMented
"If you can't eat it or hump it, piss on it and walk away."-Dog
Go where the food is.
Your first groups with a rifle look better than my first rifle groups did, so it is well within your ability. I would think your Noveske is capable of better than 2 MOA, but take into account that it isn't uncommon for an AR to shoot around 2 MOA groups, so what you are describing isn't an easy task and is something you'll want to attempt after taking as much human error out of the equation as possible. Otherwise, when your groups don't wildly impress, you won't know where to lay the blame and improve. Safely dry firing at home helped my accuracy vastly improve. You'll get there quicker than you might think.
Bookmarks