PDA

View Full Version : How far with the .223



rdsii64
05-04-2009, 10:24 PM
From what I have been able to read on my own, the typical F T/R match can be shot at up to 1000 yards. Since the .223 round really isn't going to do very well at those kinds of ranges, How far do the competitors who campaign a .223 rifle typically shoot?

Rustystud
05-04-2009, 10:54 PM
A 223 will shoot a 1000 yards. Even bolt guns loaded with 80 grainers loaded to the max get their buts kicked around by the wind. Lighter bullets tend to go subsonic before getting to the target. If you are going to shoot F-TR I would advise a long barreled 308 with 180gr Bergers.

Rustystud

Asa Yam
05-04-2009, 10:56 PM
Since the .223 round really isn't going to do very well at those kinds of ranges, How far do the competitors who campaign a .223 rifle typically shoot?
Horsepucky.

I've shot .223s at 1000 yards, and beaten others. I've been beaten at 1000 yards by .223 shooters before. You have to drive the .223 bullets harder (faster) than a .308, but it can be done - and done safely.

John Kielly
05-05-2009, 04:44 AM
This last weekend, I saw a .223 using 80 grain Amaxes shot out to 1200 yards. When the wind was up, it shot diabolically; when the wind was kinder, he won a range.

The again, some guys like pain....

gt40
05-09-2009, 10:46 PM
Would you believe hitting rocks at one mile?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4yfajXoiqg :D

"Aim small miss small", :D

gt40

SooStan
05-10-2009, 08:19 AM
I have shot my 223 bolt gun at 1000 yds. but calling the wind was a lot tougher then using my 260. On a calm day with easy conditions I can hold my own against 308s at 1000 yds. The shooter's skill is more of a factor then my rifles bullet limitations. At 300-600yds I prefere my 223. Cheaper, very accurate, and I have better follow-thru and trigger control I believe because of the lighter recoil.

Taildrag15X
05-11-2009, 07:22 AM
I'll second that SooStan, I shot my big boomer in the Match with Tom yesterday and I can't hold that .308 to .5 moa like the .223. Tom won F/TR with his .223, I'll post the scores later.

edward hogan
05-16-2009, 11:17 PM
There was an article recently in the Winter/Spring issue of The Canadian Marksman showing 1000yd performance of 90gr JLK bullets fired in a bolt rifle. The article "The New Challenge 90s in a .223" by Clint Dahlstrom is comprehensive and reports 2.5" vertical stringing in 15 and 20 rd groups at 1000yds.

http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:nstMuEmZitkJ:www.dcra.ca/Marksman/Winter%2520Spring%25202008%2520Edition.pdf+JLK+bul lets+1000+yds+canada&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=18&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Might be worth getting that 6.5 twist barrel after all?

JamieD
12-18-2009, 11:08 PM
I have a .223 that I am planning on running alot in F-T/R. I questioned the supressor on the rifle, I think they said it may be considered. The military is using them now and I think for saving the blast, noise and hearing it should be. I'm running 75 A-maxs and I have to say she is a hummer.

http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa273/Gabid1125/IMG_6944.jpg

Bring on the spring : )

JamieD
http://www.wolfprecision.net
http://AllHogsGoToHeaven.com

Taildrag15X
12-19-2009, 04:59 AM
That is sweet looking....but the supressor would never make it past an NRA tech/jury at weigh in, you could shoot the Match but the scores wouldn't count toward awards or Classification.

Check the NRA Rule Book (you should have read it by now if you are going to compete)
down load the link, it's in pdf....then you can sit and read it waiting for spring.

I know the link is already on here in at least 10 posts, but here it goes again:

http://www.nrahq.org/compete/RuleBooks/HPR/hpr-index.pdf



Section 3-EQUIPMENT AND AMMUNITION reads as this:

�� 3.16.1 Compensators and Muzzle Brakes - The use of compensators or muzzle brakes is prohibited. An
extension tube that has been installed on the muzzle of a rifle to extend the sight radius shall not be considered a “muzzle brake”. The extension tube must have an interior diameter of .5 inches or greater and may have 1/4” x 1” slots cut at 12 and 6 o’clock to remove cleaning patches. Threaded holes along the top of this tube for the installation of sight bases will be allowed.

(a) Sound suppressors are not authorized for use in high power competition.

I know, your thinking I'm not shooting High Power......but yes you are, F-Class is an extention of it and Rules are Rules.

captbill
12-19-2009, 01:23 PM
I have been out shot at a Palma match by the USMC team using thier M16's and had my but kicked in Canada by a guy shooting a .223 10 years ago. It can be done, however it appears that it requires extreme in precision as far as ammo and gun (my take).
.223 is popular in Australia but I believe they are still shooting a V bull target which is a little more forgiving that our current F class target.

JamieD
12-19-2009, 07:25 PM
That is sweet looking....but the supressor would never make it past an NRA tech/jury at weigh in, you could shoot the Match but the scores wouldn't count toward awards or Classification.

Check the NRA Rule Book (you should have read it by now if you are going to compete)
down load the link, it's in pdf....then you can sit and read it waiting for spring.

I know the link is already on here in at least 10 posts, but here it goes again:

http://www.nrahq.org/compete/RuleBooks/HPR/hpr-index.pdf



Section 3-EQUIPMENT AND AMMUNITION reads as this:

�� 3.16.1 Compensators and Muzzle Brakes - The use of compensators or muzzle brakes is prohibited. An
extension tube that has been installed on the muzzle of a rifle to extend the sight radius shall not be considered a “muzzle brake”. The extension tube must have an interior diameter of .5 inches or greater and may have 1/4” x 1” slots cut at 12 and 6 o’clock to remove cleaning patches. Threaded holes along the top of this tube for the installation of sight bases will be allowed.

(a) Sound suppressors are not authorized for use in high power competition.

I know, your thinking I'm not shooting High Power......but yes you are, F-Class is an extention of it and Rules are Rules.


I think this rule needs re-addressed. The High power was to stay true to military and the equipment they are running. Well, although they are not running muzzle brakes (outside of 50BMG's) they are running suppressors and it will soon be expanded big time. I understand not wanting to shoot next to a brake exspecially while on the ground (blast and debris) but a suppressor cuts the noise on the range and saves hearing.

Is there someone this issue can be brought up to?

Thanks,
JamieD

Taildrag15X
12-19-2009, 07:41 PM
I quess your going to want Full Auto or 3 round burst also, not everyone is a Class III.

Not every State allows a can, so IMHO it's not a good idea in High Power, let the Tactical Matches use the Special Sniper Stuff.......where it's legal of course.

OldPPC
12-19-2009, 09:02 PM
http://www.nrahq.org/compete/RuleBooks/HPR/hpr-index.pdf


I just downloaded and printed it. Looks like about a hundred pages. That'll take some time to read. :eek:
Thanks for the link...

milanuk
12-19-2009, 09:28 PM
but a suppressor cuts the noise on the range and saves hearing.

It also makes one hell of a brake, which is why most people who ask about them want to to use one... the 'noise' issue is secondary and sounds good (pardon the pun), but IME 99% of the folks are trying to game the rule that says 'no brakes or compensators'.



Is there someone this issue can be brought up to?


Not anybody you're going to get any traction with. This has been beat to death, buried, dug back up, tarred, feathered, drawn-n-quartered, and burned until not even ashes remained over the last 2-3 years. The words specifically prohibiting suppressors just got added last year, because some people tried playing fast-n-loose with their interpretation of the rules so the NRA had to spell it out for them explicitly. You can always submit to the NRA HP Committee for (re)consideration, but I think your odds of reversal this soon would be slim to none.

Pardon me for asking... but I gather you haven't actually *shot* any F-Class yet?

JamieD
12-19-2009, 10:24 PM
No, not yet. This will be the first year and I am pretty exited. I have shot in a good many matches but no F-T/R. I agree it could skirt the rules and act like a brake - but in my case it's a .223 and weights about 16.5 pounds. It doesn't need one.

As far as suppressors, most of those against one have never shot one. It is the best tool or accesory I have purchased in many, many years. I only wish I had seen one earlier. Lets face it, Fourteen years of military and law enforcement as well as 25 years of shooting and my hearing has suffered. They also keep the ranges quiter when in use (#1 complaint - noise!) So why not consider it?

JamieD

milanuk
12-19-2009, 10:35 PM
Because they function as a brake, intentional or not... which can confer a competitive advantage to people with them - and they are not legal for ownership or use in all states, which further unlevels the playing field. While I do agree that the noise benefits are considerable, until you find a way to handle those other two issues, I don't think its going anywhere

About the bit about people against suppressors... my response is that most of the people who think we need to change our rules to suit their way of thinking have never shot the sport as is. I have shot suppressed rifles, and I know very well how much they reduce recoil. Until that advantage is available to all across the board... it'll be a very tough sell.

Monte

JamieD
12-19-2009, 11:27 PM
Agree and I see your point. I don't know the stats on the states where they are legal. I should contact the NRA, they should know. It's a shame that they have been made out to be something evil or bad in the public eye. I take it to shows and you would not believe the amount of people who do not know they are legal to own let alone the benifits of owning one.

This country really makes big deals in stigmatizing things especialy when relating to guns. A friend of mine from Britain says they can be purchased over there out of the local hardware stores and it's actualy condidered rude to shoot without one.

Again, I do understand your reasoning. That said why should I have to shoot and comply to California's laws. I don't live there and sorry about the luck of those who do : ) What happens when California decides that you have to shoot lead free bullets only in there state - Does that mean I have to shoot lead free here becouse you are not allowed?



JamieD

milanuk
12-19-2009, 11:35 PM
If it were just one state... I'd probably agree with you, but its not. I guess there in lies the difference. It's subtle, and highly subjective, but thats the way I see it.

At any rate, good luck with your .223. I keep meaning to get one put together as a 'no-holds-barred' F/TR rifle, but between one thing and another... and I've got .308s coming out my ears it seems ;) My wife had one that I wrenched together (Savage) that at 600yds and in, I wouldn't have put money against her shooting it... and she doesn't practice very much. @ 1k it was a little shakey, but that was more of a function of the chamber and barrel not really being optimal for the bullets necessary for that kind of distance (only 24" long with a *very* short throat).

Good luck,

Monte

Travelor
12-20-2009, 09:36 AM
Intersting how the thread changed from shooting a 223 Rem at up to 1000 yards to the NRA stance on suppressors.


Yesterday I won our local 1000 yard F/TR class with a 223 in 10-15 mph quartering headwinds . Really a misleading statement as the other competitors were newby's but they were shooting 308 and 30-06 rifles.

I am currently shooting a 75 gr Berger VLD with a BC of .447. Remember that the BC and velocity of the cartridge/bullet is the key here not bullet weight.

:)
George

JamieD
12-20-2009, 10:31 AM
That was my bad - I didn't know the rule change and posting the picture with the suppressor started it rolling along. My .223 is 22", built for the supperssor but I am getting 2920 with 75 A-maxs so she runs to 1000. I am thinking of trying the 80's - time will tell but my personal opinion if you run the numbers outside of a bigger hole - they are equel in drift and drop and sometimes the .223 even edges the .308 out. It does it with half the recoil, and hlf the cost in components leaving lots of funds for practice.

Monte - I guess I'll have to look funny with a 22" barrel :) Would like to bring it up some with the NRA and High Power officials. Time will telll if they bend. I think the original ban was to stop gases and debbis from being blown on other shooters by brakes. The suppresor does not do that and regardless of the crying of foul - it is a great tool with a purpase. If someone want to drop a 1000 dollars to skirt the rules for a brake thats there buisisness but not my intentions. And not the original reason for the making of the no brake rule.

Gear is always funny at shoots - I seen the new Bi-pod (who knows the cost) for F-T/R on 6mmbr and you can't tell me that is a field bi-pod or military. That is a benchrest with 2 feet. The guys showing up with them no doubt feel they have an edge over shooters with a $89 harris. But, those same "one up gadget guys" would be the first to bitch if someone showed up with A. something they did not have or B. felt it gave another shooter an edge over them. It's a shame and time will tell.

Have a great Christmas

JamieD

Bill Ohio
12-20-2009, 11:45 AM
Intersting how the thread changed from shooting a 223 Rem at up to 1000 yards to the NRA stance on suppressors.


Yesterday I won our local 1000 yard F/TR class with a 223 in 10-15 mph quartering headwinds . Really a miskleading statement as the otehr competitors were newby's but they were shooting 308 and 30-06 rifles.
George

Did I miss a rule change? I thought F/TR is .223 or .308 only...

JamieD
12-20-2009, 01:00 PM
I just forwarded a copy of this thread to Janet at the NRA's high power rifle department. I hope that the reasonings and debate is read and suppressors taken back out of the illegal status. Here is a copy of my email -

Hi Janet,
I wanted to ask about the new rules about no Sound suppressores in f-T/R. I know they want high power to mirror military marksmanship. I am a 14 year veteran. The no muzzle brake rule I understand and agree whole heartedly. The rule was made to keep gasses and debris from being blown on shooters by muzzle brakes on the line. Now some see the suppressor as a way to skirt that rule and get a muzzle brake. I dissagree, the suppressor keeps the noise down, it does not blow gasses and debris and was not originally designed to be a brake and under no way does it fall into the reasoning as to why brakes where made illegal. Brakes were not made illegal becouse they control recoil. Further more neither were suppresors.

Please look at this thread as I feel it explains alot. If you could pass it forward to those who write the rules that would be apreciated. I feel the benifits of a suppressor far outway the idea that someone is side stepping the muzzle brake rule. Further more, the millitary is switching to use suppressors in a hurried fashion. They see the benifits to the shooter, battlefield and those around it. I would like to run my .223 tactical build in F-T/R class. It wieghts 17 pounds and by no means needs a muzzle brake. The suppressor was put on becouse of the sound benifits - my hearing has been suverely damaged through years of military and police. Please look at this thread on benchrest central - it really lays out my case and the counter case. http://benchrest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61395

JamieD

milanuk
12-20-2009, 01:34 PM
George,

I'm curious how fast you were punting those 75s. In my wifes gun we were running Berger 80gr VLDs around 2840fps or so. Very accurate, but compared to my (then) normal load of B155VLDs at around 2960fps, they seemed much more... twitchy, I guess is the best term. Tiny fluctuations in the wind that would move a .30 cal bullet X distance seemed to move the .224 pills X plus a bunch. Now granted it was going a bit slower, but to me and the guy pulling his hair out trying to wind coach for me, it was really noticeable - he said he was having to nearly double the corrections over what he'd normally use to get me in the 10 ring. Obviously that doesn't jive with what I've heard from other sources including your report, so I have to wonder where things went awry?

Jamie,

I appreciate your time spent in the military, etc. but somewhere you got this idea that High Power is somehow bound to military shooting and rifles. Other than Service Rifle category in some disciplines such as Across The Course (and if they're feeling brave, Palma), there are little to no military ties in HP otherwise. Whether there should or shouldn't be is a discussion for another time and place, but trying to use 'our military uses them' as an argument isn't likely to help much, unless your intent is to have everybody end up using issue ball ammo.

Monte

Taildrag15X
12-20-2009, 01:50 PM
JamieD,

I'll take half that "MY BAD" as I did the pointing at your stick.....I can see your point, I have used them, they do as they say and can be useful. But I'll stand with my first statment about not being legal in every state as Monte also point out. I cannot even think that in my life time they would be legal for me to own one in New York State, let alone USE. I live almost as far North as one can in New York and still be in the US, I'm 20 miles South of the Canadian Border and 3 miles West of Vermont and I am ruled by laws written to insure the safety of New York City and the other great Metropolis under the States rule. Even in the Great State of Vermont where Full Auto Class III is legal to be owned by private citizens you can not own a can, installed or otherwise. Mostly due to the ability to take game at night without being heard, also known as Jacking, a very big problem in an State with more wildlife than humans.

Back to the .223 question.....I hope to put mine on the line at the Nationals in March pushing 90 Bergers, if my testing doen't work out I'll stick with the 80gr. AMAX, I know they will perform as long as I'm able to do my part with the wind. I'm runing a 1-7" Krieger 28" long on a Rem. 700 sitting on a Harris with Pod Paws, my Laberge Bi-Pod is almost 3lbs so it has to stay on my old Savage 112BT PALMA to help add some weight as my back up rig.

JamieD
12-20-2009, 02:16 PM
Taildrag,
that is a nice rifle - did you do the cheekpiece? I'm hoping withing the next wek or two to hear from the NRA and get a list of states they are legal. I know that alot of states let them, few will publish it or promote them.

Hoping to get to Reade Range in central PA next week to t=do some 1000 Christmas work : )

JamieD

Taildrag15X
12-21-2009, 10:16 AM
JamieD,

It's a Savage Factory 112BT, a Competition rifle they produced in the late 90's/early 2000.

Good luck with the llist.

JamieD
12-21-2009, 03:48 PM
Not yet, Really excited to give it a go. I was tied up this past year pretty good and every fall match I tried to attend it crossed scheduels with other obligations. This year the F-class is going to take priority. I don't mind shooting it without a suppressor. It's a little short @ 22".

JamieD

AJ300MAG
12-21-2009, 04:29 PM
The no muzzle brake rule I understand and agree whole heartedly. The rule was made to keep gasses and debris from being blown on shooters by muzzle brakes on the line

If that statement were true we could move those with brakes to the end of the firing line just like we do with service rifle competitors. A muzzle brake constitutes a "competitive edge". Heck I'd love to shoot my .338 ultra with 300gr SMK's at a match for chits and giggles, WITH THE BRAKE INSTALLED! :D

A quick check shows 33 states allow cans, 17 strictly forbid them. IIRC your still at the mercy of local LE as to whether they'll sign off on your application which opens up another "can" of worms. Too much politics to get involved with. I'd love to see cans as a "shall issue" item, don't believe it will be in this lifetime...

Good luck with your endevor, don't spend too much time beating your head against a wall.

JamieD
12-21-2009, 07:08 PM
33 is higher than I expected. I was forwarned about all the hassle the local sherriff can couse - but to my surprise - he signed off like no big deal, with smiles even.

I guess I got a little to bent becouse I just got this set up with a suppressor with the idea it was allowed. Things change, so will I. I still would like to see it legal but see where it could lead with much bigger calibers.

Thanks for everyones patience while I steamed a little.

Have a good Christmas,

JamieD

AJ300MAG
12-21-2009, 07:42 PM
I was forwarned about all the hassle the local sherriff can couse - but to my surprise - he signed off like no big deal, with smiles even.

Being in law enforcement may have helped.... just a little.

Good Luck with your entrance into F-Class! Lots of good people who are more than willing to help you learn the ropes (and spend your money). Enjoy the challenge.

And a Merry Christmas to you and yours.

JamieD
12-21-2009, 08:00 PM
Probably a little : )

Thanks and have a good Christmas,

JamieD

Travelor
12-22-2009, 09:43 AM
Monte,

I am getting a velocity of 3048 fps.


Bill Ohio,

Yes, it is not one of the two calibers allowed, but the newby guy showed up and go huffy about it so we let him use it, then changed his classification to F/Open before submission to the NRA. He has not read the rules and thought that anything with a bipod met F/TR.

The fellow was awful in the pits and when the match director explained that he needed to pit up the pace on pulling/marking, he go very defensive. My guess is that he will not show up again. Pitty as we can always use new shooters and tried to help him understand the rules and the need for faster pit service in changing winds.