Interesting results after grouping my standard and BFH BCM barrels - update 02 JUN

[Wake27]

We’re all those at 6x at 48 yds?

Based on this thread, I’ve dusted off a few 16” BCM BFH carbines from the safe and took my go to BFH 11.5” to the range the last few days just to see.

I only used three types of ammo; IMI 77 gr Razor, that Winchester 62 gr OTM, and Wolf Gold. Shot 50, 100, and 200 yds.

Suffice it to say I was very pleased with my groups compared to what you’re seeing. I’m think that while probably in spec, you didn’t get the best barrel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aside from the 2-3 targets in my OP where I was using a T-2, yes, they were all fired on 6x.

I've fired .223 loads that would shoot 1" at 100 yards, then 3" at 300 yards. I 've also fired loads that would shoot 1" at 100 yards, then 9" at 300 yards. You won't know how a particular load will perform until you actually stretch out and shoot at distance. With a good barrel, 75g Match should shoot decent groups at 600 yards.

As far as the "going to sleep" theory applies, my personal experience is mostly with .30 caliber cartridges and I was told that 175g Match "goes to sleep" past 400 yards. I've seen 168g Match loads shoot 2" groups at 300 yards, but not very well at 800 yards. I've seen 175g Match shoot 4" groups at 300 yards, then shoot very good groups at 800 yards. You just don't know until you actually shoot at distance.

I've taken good equipment and good ammunition and shot poor groups due to inconsistent cheek weld. It may be something to consider.


What were the dimensions of the steel you shot at 300 meters?

I have no idea, unfortunately. I think they were all IPSC cuts, but I’m not sure since the only time we shot those was at 200 and 300 and I didn’t get a closer look. The cheek weld thing is interesting. I didn’t go into it here because it’s hard to explain, but we spent a fair amount of time at the class working around that concept. One of the better shooters in the class hopped on my gun at 200m and made three rapid hits after I had a number of misses. He shoots a lot of AKs and said that I had to use more of a chin-weld with the high mount. However, while he and the lead and instructor were trying to correct my cheek/chin weld, it just wasn’t working for me. What they were saying made sense, but every time I adjusted my head to what they were saying, I was looking over top of the scope and couldn’t see the reticle. The instructor took a pen to basically draw a line between my eye and scope and seemed kind of confused as to how I could see through the scope with my head where it was, but that’s just how it was working. That’s actually why I moved to a 1.93 mount, I really had to scrunch my neck with a regular mount and it was not at all comfortable. I’m not sure if it’s my posture or something else, but this was consistent while prone and off of a bench so I don’t know. Clearly it works for me most of the time because most of those groups from the various uppers aren’t bad.

There really is nothing wrong with a 2 MOA barrel, but a bigger scope, front and rear bags, and accurate ammunition will give you a better indication how the barrel shoots.

I had a rear bag and bipod for every group. Also, while 6x isn’t a lot, I can see the holes at 50 yards so I don’t know that I need more magnification at that distance. All of those loads are supposed to be pretty decent from what I’ve seen elsewhere. I’d be ok with a 2 MOA barrel, but the performance with the Magtech is similar to what we saw in the class - that was at least a three inch POI shift in the middle of a group.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wake27]

BCM just sent me a shipping label to send the upper into them. Already better than when Noveske made me pay to send in my defective upper.

[T2C]

I would move the optic forward or lengthen the stock before I increased the distance between the bore axis and the center of the optic to correct turkey necking.

Something I learned decades ago about cheek weld on military rifles was interesting to say the least. I mounted an optic that I pulled off a bolt action rifle that shot sub MOA groups and mounted it on a M1A. I was unable to shoot consistent groups at 100 meters with the rifle, became frustrated and tossed the rifle back in the truck.

The light bulb finally went off, which sometimes takes a while for me, I removed the optic and shot 1" ten shot iron sight groups at 100 meters with the same ammunition, frog/hole position, sling tension, etc. I mounted the optic back on the M1A and could not shoot good groups until I manufactured a cheek piece I mounted on the buttstock to achieve consistent cheek weld.

[AKDoug]

I really wish someone would make a 1.7" rail to center of scope mount. I too find the 1.5 standard to be too low, and I know the 1.93 will be too tall.

[rockapede]

I really wish someone would make a 1.7" rail to center of scope mount. I too find the 1.5 standard to be too low, and I know the 1.93 will be too tall.

Badger's Condition One mount isn't out yet (I believe) but is supposed to include a 1.7" option. Looks very much like a Geissele mount plus has options for mounting offset RDS.

https://www.badgerordnance.com/condi...lar-mount.html

[RHINOWSO]

Uber high magnification isn't a requirement to shoot tight groups at 50-100 yards. You also don't need to be able to spot your hits real time, because accuracy is the goal, not zeroing. You do need a target that allows you to place the reticle / red dot in exactly the same position every single time.

Personally I can do better when I have a defined edge to aim at, like diamond shaped targets where I shoot for the different corners. While not the exact target I use, its very similar to this one:



Much easier to see the 90 degree angle every time as opposed to trying to aim at the same part of a circle multiple times.

OP, it looks like you got a decent, but not great barrel. I have also had crappy luck with PPU 75gr 'Match'. I love PPU 55gr M193 for drills, but their match stuff sux (same for their 308 loads). It's great plinking / drill ammo, but crappy precision ammo.

[gaijin]

I’ve experienced same with CBC/Magtech 77 gr OT.
A 10 shot string yielded a 98 FPS ES.
It’s OK for 300 yds and in, but the random fliers make consistent hits much further an exercise in frustration.

[Wake27]

Just got an email saying that I have a package from BCM on the way. We’ll see what they decided on the barrel. In the meantime, I took my new 16” KAC mod 2 out on Sunday to test in a similar fashion.






Unfortunately I only had three rounds of the IMI left over.




And the PPU...






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[alx01]

Well, well, well. Amazing results. Could not have expected better out of premium barrels. That really tells a lot about KAC CHF barrels.

[gaijin]

Looks like a shooter, which isn’t surprising- but no doubt gratifying.

The PPU load is underwhelming.
Try shooting a 10 rd group with the CBC. I would experience 1 or 2 fairly extreme fliers that would blow an otherwise nice group.
Chrono proved it out with ESs of 97 FPS. I use it to 300 and can live with it.