Post: #551

Is this thread only firearms or can we talk accessories as well?

Which spotting scopes are all of you guys using (if any?) and what do you mostly use it for?

Post: #552

(10-23-2018 02:27 AM)JackinMelbourne Wrote:  Is this thread only firearms or can we talk accessories as well?

Which spotting scopes are all of you guys using (if any?) and what do you mostly use it for?

Leupold.

I find it useful for making objects appear much closer than their actual distance.

Post: #553

(10-23-2018 03:19 AM)Dulceácido Wrote:  

(10-23-2018 02:27 AM)JackinMelbourne Wrote:  Is this thread only firearms or can we talk accessories as well?

Which spotting scopes are all of you guys using (if any?) and what do you mostly use it for?

Leupold.

I find it useful for making objects appear much closer than their actual distance.

What mag power, what glass quality? At what distance can you still see holes on targets?

Do you also use it for surveillance of titties from your apartment, house, car or boat?

Do the edges of objects have colour bleed? (important if planning on taking photos through it)

etc

Post: #554

I just use 'noccers. I'll get a spotting scope if I ever find it being a limiting factor in my hunting, but for now I'm cool with my Vortex Diamonbacks 10x42. I use em on a tripod for glassing and they are great. I use all Vortex optics. Vortex glass on both my rifles as well.

Post: #555

(10-22-2018 04:32 PM)realologist Wrote:  

(10-22-2018 02:15 PM)vinman Wrote:  In the last few weeks I've bought a Smith & Wesson M&P Pro, M&P CORE, and a CZ Shadow 2. I might need an intervention.

Vinman's place

I had to go buy a new safe because the old one was full. So now I have 2. One with the guns I shoot often, and the other for the guns I don't really shoot much.

Post: #556

(10-23-2018 10:14 AM)General Stalin Wrote:  I just use 'noccers. I'll get a spotting scope if I ever find it being a limiting factor in my hunting, but for now I'm cool with my Vortex Diamonbacks 10x42. I use em on a tripod for glassing and they are great. I use all Vortex optics. Vortex glass on both my rifles as well.

Vortex optics changed the game. Before them you couldn't find good glass at a decent price. Now some of the higher end companies are dropping their prices because Vortex is killing the game. Except for companies like NightForce because they have Military and Fed contracts.

Post: #557

Amen. Tough to justify spending $800 on a pair of binoculars when another company is making a pair that is just as good or better for $250...

Post: #558

Results: 2018 International Sniper Competition

Man, the Marines are slippin'. Every marine a rifleman, my ass... Scout sniper instructor school? C'mon...
On the other hand, I'm proud to see the Army line units dominating the front! Special forces and rangers gotta do better though, if only for the pride.

Post: #559

National Guard seems pretty good. Honestly, I don't know much about them, always thought of them to be "light version" of Army.

Post: #560

Army national guard is an endless source of jokes. They are a laughing stock. But here they did surprisingly well.

Post: #561

I don't know anything about this competition, but if it's a controlled sit-and-shoot scenario then I don't see it being particularly applicable to real-life combat scenarios. For example, the Army Nation Guard I could see doing very well since they never deploy anywhere and spend just about all their time sitting on the range, PT'ing, and other weekend warrior type BS. Basically training endlessly. Guys in the field don't have the time to be putting in hours and hours sitting and pinging steel targets at 1000 yards all day everyday.

Post: #562

(10-23-2018 10:14 AM)General Stalin Wrote:  I just use 'noccers. I'll get a spotting scope if I ever find it being a limiting factor in my hunting, but for now I'm cool with my Vortex Diamonbacks 10x42. I use em on a tripod for glassing and they are great. I use all Vortex optics. Vortex glass on both my rifles as well.

I picked up a pair of diamondback 10x42s on ebay for less than $200 earlier this year and have been very happy with them. Also love knowing that their warranty is rock solid.

Mounting them on a tripod changes the game. So nice to have steady glass to look through.

On a related note, a good bino harness is good to have. I have a custom Alaska Guide Creations harness that holds all of my most important shit; phone, keys, licenses, skinning knife with spare blades, wallet, wind checker, and also my rangefinder. Great to have for spot and stalk or even hunting whitetails.

Post: #563

Yeah I got a Vortex harness too. Sounds like your rig has a ton of space. Is it bulky? I almost picked up one of the Badlands harnesses as they are just so well layed out with that magnet top and have lots of space while remaining compact but man I'll be fucked if I'm spending $100+ for a damn binocular holder. The Vortex harness was like $50 and works great and holds a few extra small items on the sides.

Post: #564

The U.S. Army is seriously considering replacing the 5.56 mm with a 6.8 mm round. About friggin' time. The .223 is so anemic that many states will not allow hunters to use it to hunt deer. A .270 would be far more suitable for combat.

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/a...iber-round

When I read "Black Hawk Down" (before a movie was ever planned), I recall how the young Army Rangers were ribbing a Delta Force operator for carrying a heavy M-14 (Delta Force operators can select whichever weapon they wish to use). During the battle, however, it became very evident that the Samalies hit by the .308 went down and stayed down, while the scrawny Samalies hit by a .223 would often pop up again later during the fighting.

Post: #565

Striking that fine balance between recoil control and stopping power in combat scenarios is a tough task. Given it's strong 60 year service record, I think the 5.56 NATO has proved itself more than effective. As ammunition and firearm technology improves we could certainly see changes in the standard issue hardware though. They likely can make a larger caliber with a lighter recoil, or conversely can make a smaller caliber that is more lethal. Hell, in somewhat recent years the .270 WIN has become a suitable cartridge for large game when in the past it was not considered powerful enough.

Post: #566

I thought it was the 6.5 Creedmore the army was looking at (nope, it's the 6.8 Remington). It has a better ballistic coefficient meaning it will shoot straighter than 5.56.

The problem with 7.62 or a bigger, heavier bullet is that you'll be carrying less ammunition on your body and in the rifle. With 5.56 its 30 round mags compared to 7.62 20 round mags. What they're trying to do is make a bigger hitting bullet with the weight and size of a 5.56.

Post: #567

(10-30-2018 07:35 PM)General Stalin Wrote:  Given it's strong 60 year service record, I think the 5.56 NATO has proved itself more than effective.

That has not been proven at all, for the reasons -- and the real life experiences -- cited in "Black Hawk Down." The .223 was used by the military for exactly the reason cited by CaptainChardonnay, i.e., so soldiers could carry more ammunition (to wound the maximum number of enemy soldiers).

Using a small projectile can work well in a war of attrition, because it only takes a few enemy soldiers to handle a corpse but it can take up to 8-10 enemy personnel to care for a wounded soldier. In other words, rifles chambered in .223 were designed to wound, not to kill, to deplete the enemy's resources.

We have once again reached the point in the evolution of war where it is more important to kill the enemy than merely wounding them to wear away at enemy resources in a war of attrition. Thus, the return to truly lethal combat rifles.

Post: #568

When the enemy is no longer a valuable soldier of a nation state but an illiterate goat-herder in a mountain somewhere then it changes the dynamic of the situation. When you're an occupation force and your opponent's strategy is to fight to the death and breed fast enough to replace the dead then utilizing a cartridge designed to merely wound someone is not productive.

The Russian 5.45×39mm has developed a pretty nasty reputation as the "poison bullet" because despite its design being in accordance with the rules of war it's still extremely lethal.



You can see that it begins to tumble immediately on impact and create two distinct wound channels. I don't know what rounds were being used by the troops in Somalia but if they were FMJs then it makes perfect sense that they leaving pinholes in the locals rather than serious wounds. In that case the difference between a 22 caliber FMJ and a 30 caliber FMJ would not be highly relevant. Bullet design and situational suitability trumps caliber (within reason). The same round that was ineffective against malnourished Africans and Afghans could be highly effective against well-fed Russians purely because they're a thick enough target for the bullet to do its work properly, but based on the picture above you can note that the new Russian round is effective regardless.

Post: #569

Interesting article about the civilian hero who took on the mass murderer in Sutherland Springs, Texas with his custom-built AR-15, including the aftermath.

https://www.texasmonthly.com/articles/st...ss-murder/

Post: #570

(10-30-2018 06:09 PM)General Stalin Wrote:  Yeah I got a Vortex harness too. Sounds like your rig has a ton of space. Is it bulky? I almost picked up one of the Badlands harnesses as they are just so well layed out with that magnet top and have lots of space while remaining compact but man I'll be fucked if I'm spending $100+ for a damn binocular holder. The Vortex harness was like $50 and works great and holds a few extra small items on the sides.

I don't think it's bulky at all. The harness I got retails for around $100 new but I buy almost everything used. If you look around during the off season you can find stuff cheap. The Vortex harness you got is plenty good though.

Post: #571

He really is John Wick.

Post: #572

Apparently the 19x is the most commercially successful Glock so far. I suggest you guys give this guy a follow, his videos are good and he knows what hes talking about.

Post: #573

I got myself a Sig Sauer P229 in 9MM Luger. Pretty badass gun - I can shoot tight groupings with that thing all day. Not the best concealed carry gun but does the trick with the right holster.

Post: #574

(11-05-2018 06:27 PM)bootyhuntah Wrote:  I got myself a Sig Sauer P229 in 9MM Luger. Pretty badass gun - I can shoot tight groupings with that thing all day. Not the best concealed carry gun but does the trick with the right holster.

I miss having the Sig accuracy. Don't get me wrong, I am a very good shot, but my Sigs gave me good accuracy and helped me learn how to shoot pistols. I cannot wait to get one of the new ones next year.

Post: #575

Sig p320 9mm owner here. It's my first handgun and I hated the stock frame so I bought an X-frame for it. Haven't fired it with the new grip yet but I'm looking forward to trying it out. My accuracy is god fucking awful with that gun so far. I'm learning the basics of grip and trigger technique to get my grouping better (and faster).