TR Forums

Five seven is an expensive solution looking for a problem IMO

That's how I feel about a lot of new cartridges really, from the past 20 years. I mean, how many cartridges do we actually need? holy crap.

paulWTAMU wrote:

I mean, how many cartridges do we actually need? holy crap.

http://xkcd.com/927/

I gotta say...a wood stocked M16A1 just doesn't look right. It just doesn't. It looks about as wrong as a polymer stocked M1 Garand, or a Glock with a frame that isn't made out of Tupperware.

Vrock wrote:

I gotta say...a wood stocked M16A1 just doesn't look right. It just doesn't.

Right or wrong (and I tend heavily to the "right" side, being a big fan of furniture), a bunch of well-done checkering would greatly help the look.

Checkering? Military rifles don't have checkering. Not a one. Checkering is for old men with sweaty hands who fancy themselves master deer hunters.

Vrock wrote:

who fancy themselves master deer hunters.

Alas, Vrock, only in car season.

Tried a couple different pistols last night, a Beretta 92 9mm and a SIG 1911 .45..

yeah a bit more recoil with a .45!, and I couldn't get used to the 1911 style grip, the Beretta was OK, chubby grip though.

I felt at home back on the CZ though, tried some metal targets at 15 meters, did OK.. was tired last night, so only 200 rds.

I handled a few revolvers on my way out, S&W M&P .357 in stealth black... oooooh baby!

Range received 6 nice new Ruger MK3 Hunter's , I gotta try one of those next time.

I like checkered and haven't hunted deer in my life

But not the super aggressive stuff that digs into my hands. Good lord folks. The gun shouldn't draw blood at both ends

I like checkered grips on pistols, makes sense. Don't really see the benefit for most rifles.

cappa84 wrote:

Why are people fascinated by guns?

I don’t mean for my question to have ‘smartass’ intentions, but I’d just like to know (especially from gun-owners) just what is it that you find fascinating about guns, or weapons in general?

Same answer with computer hardware, audiophile gears, and automobiles : because they are toys. Admit it, we men never really grow up. The difference between us and boys are the price of the toys.

Please don't feed the trolls, especially the really old ones.

Got run off the range by lightening today before I could get more than 6 shots off. Only one group was good because there was a loud ass thunder peal right when I started to pull the triger for the second shot in the second group We need the rain so I'm not really mad but I am a bit miffed.
Looks like I need to come down a bit for 100 yard zero.

So, next gun is going to be a quarter bore bolt gun or a full size 9mm. If it's a 9mm I'm doing either the Beretta 92 or the CZ 75 since I have friends with both and can test them out.

If it's a bolt gun though....I'm leaning towards .243 or .25-06. Options would be a middle end Savage like a 110/111, a Tikka, or a CZ 557 or possibly a Ruger M77. Those I *can't* try before I buy, anyone used them all and have thoughts? I plan to google too, but hey, more data points.

I've owned a cz-75 (sold it a while back, should not have done that!) and I currently own a M9. The CZ is heavier, but has an all steel frame and IMO, a better double action trigger and grip. The M9 has a slightly longer barrel and I think sight radius. The M9 does have a blocky grip so if you have smaller hands it can be uncomfortable. Enjoy shooting both, they are both great pistols.

What Vrock said..

I have very limited experience, but 1500 rounds with my CZ have been the shizzle..

paulWTAMU wrote:

If it's a bolt gun though....I'm leaning towards .243 or .25-06. Options would be a middle end Savage like a 110/111, a Tikka, or a CZ 557 or possibly a Ruger M77. Those I *can't* try before I buy, anyone used them all and have thoughts? I plan to google too, but hey, more data points.

My wife is using a custom Savage 110 in .243 for her 1,000 yard shooting. We're going to see if she likes competition. Right now, it's a matter of paperwork & waiting on the membership list.

Anyways, the Savage she's using is pretty heavily modified, but it is a great rifle. The .243 barely kicks at all and with a custom load you can reach out to any range you wish. I'm told it's a great round for deer if that's your thing. I've heard a lot of good things about the bang/buck ratio on the Savages from the factory.

1000 yards with a .243 O.o Holy crap.

i'm really leaning towards the Savage Classic Bolt (or maybe the Trophy Hunter XP) if I do Savage, or the Tikka Hunter if I do the Tikka. I want *one* rifle with a nice wood stock

The trophy hunter is the less expensive (600ish), the other savage and the tikka are both ~670.

Scoped bolts. I guess at some point, I'm going to want to buy one. I'm just not old enough yet.

Vrock wrote:

Scoped bolts. I guess at some point, I'm going to want to buy one. I'm just not old enough yet.

Well, it is time for your first real rifle. [/ducks]

Pfft. Try hitting the bullseye at 100 yards with a 119 year old surplus Mauser bolt action with issue sights that are locked for a 300 meter zero. That's a real rifle, with history, and character, and one that takes time, skill, and practice to shoot well. These silly deer slayer guns with their fancy optics make it too easy.

Built a 2 gun upper.
16" .223 wylde barrel in a billet upper.

Why a billet instead of a forged? I see billet stuff for much more money than forged. What's the hoopla? Forged is generally stronger material, too.

Vrock wrote:

Why a billet instead of a forged? I see billet stuff for much more money than forged. What's the hoopla? Forged is generally stronger material, too.

Well, I ordered a forged initially, but they sent me a billet instead. It's a $150 upper vs $80, so I wasn't going to complain.

However, I believe billet is superior because it can be machined more precisely than forged parts. This particular upper is machined from 7075 aluminum instead of 6061 on cheaper billet receivers, and has thicker walls than a normal forged receiver, so strength isn't an issue. It's also fluted on the left side to reduce weight. My only gripe with this receiver is that you can't use FF rails with anti-rotation tabs.

I agree with you though, forged receivers are perfectly fine.

The billet receiver does look very nice. Enjoy your new rifle.

Pfft. Try hitting the bullseye at 100 yards with a 119 year old surplus Mauser bolt action with issue sights that are locked for a 300 meter zero. That's a real rifle, with history, and character, and one that takes time, skill, and practice to shoot well. These silly deer slayer guns with their fancy optics make it too easy.

Yeah, I used to be able to hold 3 inch groups with my 1903 Springfield. However, with old age I can't see either the target at 100 yards, or the iron sights on the rifle...at least not both at the same time.

Muscle memory and instinct aiming allowed me to at least hit the target on my last try. But to tighten it up any, I'm going to have to look at getting a scope.

If not for technology, I would soon be drifting out to sea on that proverbial Eskimo ice berg.

I hear that. I'm correctable to about 20/25, but I think I'd need bifocals or something to actually use iron sights. Used to be able to, out to about 50-75 yards but these days I can't even do that with a standard target. I simply can't really make out anything on it. I can see the frame, and I know the targets on it but....I'm debating canceling my gun budget for a year or two to pay for Lasik.

Not to derail this thread but paulWTAMU you should research Lasik very carefully. There is a cut off age (sort of) when Lasik is a waste of money and thats around 30-35. Why? At 40 the composition of the eye changes and that's when people start needing reading glasses. Some people try and do the Monovision procedure. It is a laser eye surgery that leaves one eye corrected for near vision and the other eye corrected for distance vision. But the failure rates on this are high because of the obvious drawbacks. (I attempted this with glasses just last year and I got some pounding headaches from it. I just couldnt get used to it.)

However, there isnt really a set rule for Lasik. The best indicator is if you have a very stable prescription.

As far a shooting goes, You should try and learn how to shoot with both eyes open and in the very least start using a red dot or ACOG type sight.

I can only agree with tanker27 on this one.

Research it and make sure it's a good fit for you. Especially if you are coming on an age where age-changes related to vision start to creep in.
Usually you get farsighted with age, but the problem is that Lasik is best with correcting near-sightedness, and much less so when correcting far-sightedness. This is because far-sightedness require you to add curvature to the cornea to correct it, something taking much more material away, giving you less headroom for thickness after operation.

Basically, cornea thickness and stable proscription is what the main points before doing lasik is. And basically the only reason I could correct my -7ish values. Normally we don't consider it safe to do more then -6ish (near sighted)/ +3,5 (far-sighted) or something here in Sweden, although I've seen vastly higher numbers going on elsewhere, which might explain a lot of extra complains, but my corneas was 50% ticker then normal. I did mine while I was 23 and have been free of glasses and still having normal vision 13 years later, starting out at much better then normal. It wasn't without problems, but nothing that wasn't expected after research. Some halo effects on certain lights at night and similar, especially with large pupils.

Read up on it before you do it, because there is no one to blame if it goes wrong, but if everything pans out, it can be great.

I'm extremely near sighted. My last prescription was 20/700 or 650. I'm correctable to 20/25 or thereabouts with glasses so I can drive (with corrective lenses obviously).

Vrock wrote:

The billet receiver does look very nice. Enjoy your new rifle.

Danke sehr

paulWTAMU wrote:

I'm extremely near sighted. My last prescription was 20/700 or 650. I'm correctable to 20/25 or thereabouts with glasses so I can drive (with corrective lenses obviously).

Have yall tried doing the eye exercise where you hold a pencil (or similar object) about 6-8 inches from your face and alternate your focus between that object and something really far away?

It's what I do to fight off my studying-induced myopia. I do sets of 20 throughout the day.