I really need to invent some type of worthless device that sounds good to newbs. This working 40+ hours a week is getting old.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I really need to invent some type of worthless device that sounds good to newbs. This working 40+ hours a week is getting old.
How about for recreational shooter we throw these in with the kns pins not needed
Not to resurrect and old thread but this came up on a Google search.
I recently bought a Colt Canada SR20.(civi verson of the C7) I live in Canada and am a civilian. I always said to myself if CC opens up sales to the public, I will get one! Pricey, but I have it now. Only a limited run of the classics before they switch to the Integrated Upper Receiver style.
It is suppose to be mil spec faithful to the Canadian Forces TDP. The barrels are suppose to be very accurate, the furniture designed for the cold and so on. Probably the best AR-15 that you can buy. The SAS uses them in the C8 version....
Anyway, it came with the Accuwedge, the black one. I had heard of this thing and did a Google search to determine what it is. It seems the general feeling is it is a waste. It is part of the CF TDP so they use it. I have not heard of any horror stories of them coming apart but then I have never served though I do have friends who have. If they are causing problems we probably will not hear about it either.
I did find it hard to take apart and needed a tool to remove the rear pin. I have not shot it yet either, still waiting on the registration papers to come through so I can take it to the range. (As a stipulation of my Authorization to Transport paperwork....a real get-out-of-jail-free-card... I need to have the registration paperwork as well which has not arrived in the mail....the AR-15s are restricted just like handguns and are registered and range toys only.....yes it sucks!!)
I may try an accuracy test with it in and out and see if there is any difference. As this is a range toy only it probably will not matter if it stays in or out. I am not using it for "work", though the RCMP does as do several other police forces and tac teams. I will not be hunting with it, as that is illegal. Nor will I be using it for "self defense" or "home defense" as that is not a reason for owning a firearm in Canada (brought to you by law by a Liberal Prime Minister a few decades ago....) and being restricted it must have a trigger lock AND be in the safe. No chance of me getting it into action at any rate. (My SKS can however reside next to the bed with a trigger lock on and bayonet extended...)
Anyway, just wanted to state that Colt Canada ships theirs with an Acuwedge from the factory.
Leave it in there; it won't hurt a thing... JMO
Ain't no pockets on a shroud..
you can trim it with a box cutter if it's too difficult to remove the takedown pin
Blame Canada.
Canada is the most significant reason for all of this Accu-Wedge BS (improves accuracy) in the first place. When the C7A1 was introduced it was given an Elcan and the Accuwedge at the same time. Perceived accuracy (not actual accuracy) obviously improved because of the optic that was mounted to the weapon. However, much of this accuracy improvement was credited not to the $700 optic, but the $1.49 piece of rubber that eliminated "wobble".
Canada's army can have whatever specifications it wishes, that doesn't give it legitimacy. Shooters don't make these kinds of decisions. In the case of the accuwedge, it is the doings of some General who probably hasn't finger banged a rifle in decades. Don't be offended, this behavior isn't specific to Arctic dwellers - the US Army higher-ups are guilty of it too.
Virtually every single U.S. Marine can tell you stories of OCS/MCRD M16A2s that wobbled more than Jessica Vanessa and still scored consistent hits on a 20" wide target at 500 yards. This is pretty significant given that M855 is only rated at 5 MOA. I have personally seen multiple Mk12s that had this "wobble" being fired at Pu'uloa range in Hawaii with Mk262 shoot sub MOA at 300 yards.
I can't speak to any objective evidence about whether it rounds out the takedown pin or any such thing, but I can say that there is no appreciable effect on accuracy whatsoever. I am biased, but every time I see someone with that piece of orange trash in their lower receiver I immediately think ill-informed Bubba.
Why do the loudest do the least?
This is a bit of thread drift, but related directly to one of Tango4N's comments:
If your Restricted Firearm is in a safe, it does not need to be trigger locked as well, and can have a loaded magazine in the safe, right next to the Restricted Firearm, as long as it is not attached to the firearm. Anyone who tells you anything different does not know the law. If someone chooses to do more than required by law, that is personal preference.
Regards.
Mark
99.9% of shooters, especially the 50m AR15 ballistic masturbation crowd cannot appreciate any difference in POI with a sloppy gun. So likely it won't matter or be discernible to you.
However, to say that the barrel and sights are attached and so it matter not how solid the upper and lower wobbles is contrary to piles of empirical match shooting knowledge. People who have the data points to notice sub moa shifts. There is a reason legacy bolt guns(pre chassis) were bedded, that M-14's lugged and bedded variants shot better than the non lugged, and AR15's on national teams are uber tight matched or bedded at the push pin lugs. Stock and action interface are important on the high end of performance.
Consistent recoil force and torque management matters on POI. A simple and readily acknowledged example, witnessed by a fair amount of shooters, is loading bipod legs.
Not suggesting accuwedge is the answer, but I'm not dismissive of receiver wobble in a 400m+ gun.
Dano's comments are consistent with information that I got from Dave Grimshaw, formerly of the AMU, and now with SIG Sauer. I spent a week at the SIG Academy this summer, and most of that time was spent in Dave's classes.
From tests and experiments at the AMU and SIG, including using an accuracy sled weighing several hundred pounds, they determined that upper/lower fit did have a bearing on accuracy. Possibly not enough to make any difference to most shooter/ammunition/rifle combinations, but enough for combinations at the pinnacle of the sport. The Accu-Wedge is not necessarily the answer, but the idea behind it is not an internet myth.
Of course, a few people are going to disagree with this, but until they can show me actual test data to prove otherwise, their opinions are well...well you know what they say about opinions.
Regards.
Mark
Bookmarks