Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27

Thread: Knight's Armament Accuracy Issue

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Lowcountry, SC.
    Posts
    6,230
    Feedback Score
    30 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by duroSIG556R View Post
    Any update? I'm curious to see some actual targets. M193 isn't supposed to be crap ammo. See: The US accuracy specification for M193 cited in MIL-C-9963F is as follows:

    The average of the mean radii of all targets of the sample cartridges, fired at 200 yards, shall not exceed 2.0 inches.

    These averages are from 10-shot groups fired from machine rested, bolt-actioned, heavy test barrels. All things being equal this specification equates to a mean radius of 1 inch at 100 yards (the distance at which I tested this ammunition).
    There seems to be a rash of discussion of M193 ammo on the internet lately. The common theme? Zero posters have actual US mil M193.

    Federal XM is not M193. Wolf Gold is not M193. Hornady Frontier is not M193. Winchester commercial “M193” would not pass anyone’s QC. Literally Tulammo steel cased is better. Tula steel cased is also not M193. Pretty much anything that people call “M193”, isn’t…. at all….almost ever.

    It is impossible to have these discussions without a not-inaccurate description of the ammo used.

    Break

    Most 55gr ammo is garbage and will produce garbage results. 6 minutes, however indicates a real problem with the rifle or ammo. But if it shoots straight with decent ammo, we know where the problem lies.

    Quote Originally Posted by grizzman View Post
    .......

    I doubt the OP is using legitimate M193 ammo that has passed all QC testing required of M193. He's probably using M193-ish ammo, which still hasn't been identified. The testing procedure and optic setup also hasn't been specified.


    Hey Euro, I don’t remember where you said it, but if you want to borrow some Tula 55gr to see if that gun will run it, I can bring some by.
    RLTW

    “What’s New” button, but without GD: https://www.m4carbine.net/search.php...new&exclude=60 , courtesy of ST911.

    Disclosure: I am affiliated PRN with a tactical training center, but I speak only for myself. I have no idea what we sell, other than CLP and training. I receive no income from sale of hard goods.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Eastern NC
    Posts
    8,725
    Feedback Score
    88 (100%)

    Knight's Armament Accuracy Issue

    Quote Originally Posted by Serlo II View Post
    Sorry for the delay, I'm not online daily.
    I have a caldwell rest and also sandbags. I sight in at 36 yards then test at 100 and 200. Optic is Vortex Razor HD 1-6

    I'm going to double check the barrel crown and give it a good scrub for copper fouling and try again.
    I was at a 3-gun practice night and let some other guys shoot it. I'm almost burned through my m193 ammo supply and have been doing well with the 62 grain rounds. One young guy who's a very good shooter wanted to try it out and used his own 55gr ammo. He was kind of stunned that he had a hard time hitting the steel disc spinner at 100 yards. He can normally get it spinning pretty quick.
    It’s worth reaching out to KAC to see what they say. I had to use their CS once and they were super helpful. I could see either side of this, there’s a general conception that each barrel will have a particular preference it that drastically different performance is a bit unusual for just seven grains.

    They may ask you to try some known good lighter loads though. SGAmmo has 56gr MEN in stock which is good for plinking stuff IIRC and I’m sure there are some match rounds at 50-55gr.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Wake27; 06-29-22 at 12:55.
    Sic semper tyrannis.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Lowcountry, SC.
    Posts
    6,230
    Feedback Score
    30 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Wake27 View Post
    It’s worth reaching out to KAC to see what they say. I had to use their CS once and they were super helpful. I could see either side of this, there’s a general conception that each barrel will have a particular preference it that drastically different performance is a bit unusual for just seven grains.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I agree that KAC CS needs to be involved, and that barrels have preference. However, its not the 7gr difference that is likely to be the culprit. I’ve observed and reported here wild spreads in velocity in shitty ball ammo (such as Win “M193”). I’ve noticed visible runout and even off-center points with some ammo. Its not likely to be a weight problem, but rather a quality problem.
    RLTW

    “What’s New” button, but without GD: https://www.m4carbine.net/search.php...new&exclude=60 , courtesy of ST911.

    Disclosure: I am affiliated PRN with a tactical training center, but I speak only for myself. I have no idea what we sell, other than CLP and training. I receive no income from sale of hard goods.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,867
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by 1168 View Post
    Winchester commercial “M193” would not pass anyone’s QC. Literally Tulammo steel cased is better.
    What kind of QC problems? I have few boxes of 62 grain Winchester. Is it safe to shoot?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Lowcountry, SC.
    Posts
    6,230
    Feedback Score
    30 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Disciple View Post
    What kind of QC problems? I have few boxes of 62 grain Winchester. Is it safe to shoot?
    I SUSPECT that it is safe to shoot. The concern that I’ve noted that would prevent it from passing DoD quality requirements is velocity spread, though the highest velocity rounds in a string seem normal (opposite of Frontier). I’ve shot piles of it and never blown up a gun. It was one of the issued training loads for the SRT when I was playing that game.
    RLTW

    “What’s New” button, but without GD: https://www.m4carbine.net/search.php...new&exclude=60 , courtesy of ST911.

    Disclosure: I am affiliated PRN with a tactical training center, but I speak only for myself. I have no idea what we sell, other than CLP and training. I receive no income from sale of hard goods.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    32,893
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Disciple View Post
    What kind of QC problems? I have few boxes of 62 grain Winchester. Is it safe to shoot?
    Win's Q3131 is some rough looking stuff. I've never put it under any real measurements because it's so ugly, people would be like.... "yeah... look at that stuff.. What did you think you'd find?"
    "What would a $2,000 Geissele Super Duty do that a $500 PSA door buster on Black Friday couldn't do?" - Stopsign32v

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,751
    Feedback Score
    22 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by 1168 View Post
    There seems to be a rash of discussion of M193 ammo on the internet lately. The common theme? Zero posters have actual US mil M193.

    Federal XM is not M193. Wolf Gold is not M193. Hornady Frontier is not M193. Winchester commercial “M193” would not pass anyone’s QC. Literally Tulammo steel cased is better. Tula steel cased is also not M193. Pretty much anything that people call “M193”, isn’t…. at all….almost ever.

    It is impossible to have these discussions without a not-inaccurate description of the ammo used.

    Break

    Most 55gr ammo is garbage and will produce garbage results. 6 minutes, however indicates a real problem with the rifle or ammo. But if it shoots straight with decent ammo, we know where the problem lies.





    Hey Euro, I don’t remember where you said it, but if you want to borrow some Tula 55gr to see if that gun will run it, I can bring some by.
    Here is some "real" M193 data, foreign mil-contract buy back stuff. My 14.5" Hodge will shoot this stuff like crap 3.5-4 MOA while the 16" Hodge I just got will put this stuff into 2 MOA or just slightly under in 10-shot groups all day long. Hot barrel, cold barrel didn't matter. I guess the barrel just likes this stuff. Anyone who hasn't figured out every barrel is a rule onto itself hasn't shot enough yet.

    Quote Originally Posted by markm View Post
    Win's Q3131 is some rough looking stuff. I've never put it under any real measurements because it's so ugly, people would be like.... "yeah... look at that stuff.. What did you think you'd find?"
    Ive shot some gnarly ammo, like Vietnam era stuff that was turning green. No problems except it would smell like crap(probably powder degradation) but it was safe. Id shoot that over Winchester XM bullshit that blows primers, splits necks...no thanks. Ill take the green Vietnam era ammo.
    Last edited by vicious_cb; 06-29-22 at 15:05.
    Forward Ascertainment Group

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •