HPS ammo

fish slapped

Anyone using the HPS 308 155gr rounds and if so what kind of results are you getting??


Picy's would be great!!

bunny shooter

I'm sure Tac will be onto this soon :eek: ............... you'll hear all about his Remmy & HPS. Apart from pimping guns those are his fav subjects :P

Cass

I have used all of the target HPS ammo (which unless you specifically order) most off HPS' ammo is.

The 155 gr bullets in .308 are a great round, as with all HPS ammo. They have an average MV of 2950 fps from a 30" barrel. They maintain supersonic velocity out to 1,000 yards giving great, and more importantly, consistant results. The other HPS ammo would include 168, 175, 190 and 200 gr bullets. Other variations are available however these must be specifically ordered from Carmicheal himself (or an agent i would presume).

The 155s are the fastest of the HPS factory loads and so use less MOA/clicks to acheieve the necessary height. They are more prone to wind than the heavier rounds, but really test your wind reading abilities. They have a BC of 0.445 compared to 0.483 - 0.535 of the heavier bullets. Most importantly they are considerably more accurate and consistant than the next available factory load here which would be Lapua Scenar's. Still a fantastic bullet, but at €42 per 20 for lapua and €52 per 50 of HPS which would you choose.

Below is a full drop chart for the 155 gr bullets i've tried at the various ranges over the last months. It was shot from a 30", 1:12 twist barrel, 100yd zero, and a 0.25 click value scope. Hope it helps.


HPS AMMO ONLY



100yds - 200yds - 300yds - 500yds - 600yds - 800yds - 900yds - 1,000yds

- 0

---

1

---

4.5 ---- 10.75

---

13

---

22.5 ---- 27.25 ---- 33.5 - MOA

- 0

---

4

---

18

---

43

---

52

---

90

---

108

---

134 - Clicks

Vegeta

ezridax wrote: »

€52 per 50 of HPS

Jesus that is good value

tac foley

bunny shooter wrote: »

I'm sure Tac will be onto this soon :eek: ............... you'll hear all about his Remmy & HPS. Apart from pimping guns those are his fav subjects :P

Pimping guns? Moi?

You must be thinking of somebody else called tac.

Most of my guns would be used as tomato stakes by the likes of youse guys.

tac

bunny shooter

tac foley wrote: »

........You must be thinking of somebody else called tac......

I am : ) tacwho ; )

And don't forget I LOVE "old" guns too ; )

fish slapped

Deffo worth putting a few down through the AI then, when the licence arrives (promised within the next 2 weeks!!)

Any other ammo worth trying for targets along with the HPS and Lapua...

Tackleberrywho

bunny shooter wrote: »

I'm sure Tac will be onto this soon :eek: ............... you'll hear all about his Remmy & HPS. Apart from pimping guns those are his fav subjects :P

hardy har har
HPS 125grain Nosler Ballistic tipped, €179 for 100= €1.79 per round= €35.80 per 20. Which makes it very high quality ammo cheaper than hornady in similar configuration, and cheaper than Remington Match .308 ammo in Target configuration.

However hornady Tap 155grain (€45 a box 20) standard deviation was 9fps and HPS was 12fps. so an extra tenner for 3 fps on average is a poor trade off.

Cass

fish slapped wrote:

Any other ammo worth trying for targets along with the HPS and Lapua...

Honestly i wouldn't even bother with the Lapua. From a price and performance point of view you will only loose out on both fronts.

Remeber if its a 1:12 to 1:14 twist stay with 155 gr, if its a
1:8 to 1:11 try stay with 175 gr to 190 gr.

Tackleberrywho, i think that fish slapped is asking from a target shooting perspective. So hornady tap and the noslar rounds you use would not be suitable for the job.

Apologies if i'm mistaken.

Tackleberrywho

ezridax wrote: »

Honestly i wouldn't even bother with the Lapua. From a price and performance point of view you will only loose out on both fronts.

Remeber if its a 1:12 to 1:14 twist stay with 155 gr, if its a
1:8 to 1:11 try stay with 175 gr to 190 gr.

Tackleberrywho, i think that fish slapped is asking from a target shooting perspective. So hornady tap and the noslar rounds you use would not be suitable for the job.

Apologies if i'm mistaken.

Ezri, I would have not replied at all except bunny was slagging me off,so without being childish I have given information on HPS ammo, I concur not target ammo, however they maintain (HPS) they use the same procedures and quality as they do in their hunting as they do in their Target

My .308 is a 1/12 and I found the Remington match were the best to group, almost 1 hole(I have not got the box any more so not definite on grain weight),
followed by hornady tap 155grain, and then followed by HPS hunting.

In HPS target, the price is hard to beat and accuracy for the buck.
AFAIK HPS is much more affordable than Remington match ammo.
All my tests were on the 100 yard range so for Target shooters my info is limited, however standard deviation in a product is a good indication of performance.
The caveat being, I have not got a Custom barrel so the deviation could be attributed to this.

Perhaps you could test a few HPS target and a few of my HPS hunting in your target barrel and see if the HPS SD is consistent across the product range.

bunny shooter

Slagging off is a bit strong Poking FUN is more the way I see it

Cass

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Ezri, I would have not replied at all except bunny was slagging me off,so without being childish I have given information on HPS ammo, I concur not target ammo, however they maintain (HPS) they use the same procedures and quality as they do in their hunting as they do in their Target

Deep breaths Tack.

I'm sure the quality in all HPS ammo is the same and all top notch. However there is still a real difference between a target round/bullet compared to a hunting round/bullet.

• Firstly the BC of a 125 gr (you use) would be around 0.366 whereas my target bullets would be between 0.505 to 0.535.
• Secondly there is the powder. I think HPS use ViT140 in the target rounds, but not in the hunting rounds. Could be wrong on that, but i don't see the need to be pushing a hunting round anywhere near as fast as a target round.
• Thirdly the weight of a 125 gr hunting round is too light. You may need to go for a heavier bullet to give you some wind bucking properties. So you need 170gr hunting bullet to get the same BC as a 155 gr target.
• Lastly the price. You mentioned your hunting ammo cost €179 per 100. Target ammo costs €104 per 100. Its down to design and purpose.

I'm sure the hunting ammo is well capable of target shootig to a limited degree, however you are better of using ammo that is specifically designed for the purpose you intend it for.

All my tests were on the 100 yard range so for Target shooters my info is limited, however standard deviation in a product is a good indication of performance.

I still maintain a 100 yd distance (for target shooting anyway) is a poor guide to the true performance of a .308 cal bullet. Most rounds would not stabilise until 200yds. So for a true (minimum) test of a bullets ability would be at 300yds. After your 100 yd zero of course.

Perhaps you could test a few HPS target and a few of my HPS hunting in your target barrel and see if the HPS SD is consistent across the product range.

Afraid not. Anything under 175 gr and my rifle will not shoot well. Too light. Mine is the 1:10 twist. Have tried using lighter rounds and she sis not like them. it doesn't matter though as i had her built for the bigger bullets and 190 gr or 200 gr she loves.

dCorbus

From my relatively limited experience, the HPS .308 in 155gr stabilise best from 300-400yd's outward. The 100yd is only my zero'ing distance - and oddly enough I've found the MOA-measured groups are smaller out at 300yd.

That's in a 26'' 1:11 twist factory barrel.

They're a good round - but again, it depends on your own rifle and your own needs.

(I've also found the heavier 175gr HPS out of the same rifle bucks the wind a wee bit better at 500 - 600yds, but doesn't seem to have the legs out to the 1000yd)

What rifle / action / barrel are you using? (You mention the AI - which model?) And what distances are you intending to target shoot? - as all these will make a difference in your ammo choice.

Hope that's of some minor help (but TBH I think ezridax has probably rattled through a good few more different HPS rounds that many of us put together on his quest for perfection!:D)

dC

Cass

dCorbus wrote: »

................ (but TBH I think ezridax has probably gone through more different HPS rounds that many of us put together on his quest for perfection!:D)

dC

Still ........................................... questing.

dCorbus

PS I forgot to mention that my abovementioned rifle also likes the 168 Lapua Scenars -

but I get better results and consistency from the HPS, with the added bonus of saving a shed-load of cash (which is nice).

Tackleberrywho

ezridax wrote: »

Deep breaths Tack.

I'm sure the quality in all HPS ammo is the same and all top notch. However there is still a real difference between a target round/bullet compared to a hunting round/bullet.

• Firstly the BC of a 125 gr (you use) would be around 0.366 whereas my target bullets would be between 0.505 to 0.535.
• Secondly there is the powder. I think HPS use ViT140 in the target rounds, but not in the hunting rounds. Could be wrong on that, but i don't see the need to be pushing a hunting round anywhere near as fast as a target round.
• Thirdly the weight of a 125 gr hunting round is too light. You may need to go for a heavier bullet to give you some wind bucking properties. So you need 170gr hunting bullet to get the same BC as a 155 gr target.
• Lastly the price. You mentioned your hunting ammo cost €179 per 100. Target ammo costs €104 per 100. Its down to design and purpose.

I'm sure the hunting ammo is well capable of target shootig to a limited degree, however you are better of using ammo that is specifically designed for the purpose you intend it for.




I still maintain a 100 yd distance (for target shooting anyway) is a poor guide to the true performance of a .308 cal bullet. Most rounds would not stabilise until 200yds. So for a true (minimum) test of a bullets ability would be at 300yds. After your 100 yd zero of course.




Afraid not. Anything under 175 gr and my rifle will not shoot well. Too light. Mine is the 1:10 twist. Have tried using lighter rounds and she sis not like them. it doesn't matter though as i had her built for the bigger bullets and 190 gr or 200 gr she loves.

Fair enough Ezri, I think the Match ammo was 175 grain, however I can not be sure.
I've only a 20" barrel so I'm not sure if the round will stabilize at the same range.

Perhaps the barrel length would make no difference, but one would imagine that different lengths would give a variance in results.

Anywho, much as I'd love to stay and chat, I'm off to my 30th birthday Party

Cass

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Anywho, much as I'd love to stay and chat, I'm off to my 30th birthday Party

You can read this when you get back so.

I've only a 20" barrel so I'm not sure if the round will stabilize at the same range.

Perhaps the barrel length would make no difference, but one would imagine that different lengths would give a variance in results.

Barrel length is crucial. The majority of HPS ammo is loaded to be fired from a 30" barrel. Some sources say that for every 1" you are short of the 30" inch mark you loose between 35-50 fps from the true MV of the round. Say thats true and the 155 target ammo has a MV of 2950 fps. You would (possibly) loose 350 - 500 fps meaing your MV could potentially be 2450 - 2500 fps. Meaing if you were to shhot beside me with the same ammo and both zeroed for 100yds and we moved to say 300yds. You would need more MOA than me to reach the same distance.

There is also the fact that with a reduced MV (because of the shortened barrel) you may not have, either the MOA on your scope to reach the longer distances or worse again, because of the reduced MV, not have the speed needed to accurately hit the target with any consistancy. I hope i explained that somewhat well.

You could always go the other way too. It is somewhat agreed that at 32" you have reached the optimal length for a barrel to achieve the best results. A 34" or even 36" barrel may produce slightly higher velocities however the extra velocity attained would be minimal compard to the cost (and weight) of having such a long barrel. In other words after 32" you do not get as much in return for the extra length.

Tackleberrywho

I always adhere to your advice !

ranger4

Is the HPs ammo availible mollycoated.

Cass

With a hunting bullet, perhaps, but as per the name of the forum we are refering to the target bullets. So it would be a no to them being moly coated.

demonloop

ranger4 wrote: »

Is the HPs ammo availible mollycoated.

Affirmative.

Tackleberrywho

ezridax wrote: »

With a hunting bullet, perhaps, but as per the name of the forum we are refering to the target bullets. So it would be a no to them being moly coated.

If HPS in this configuration
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=273029
The BC is quite good,(almost as good as 168 grain hornady match ammo) and it's a hunting round, but could do target for guys plinking.

For someone who likes plinking and not bothered about comps (I'm guessing there is some out there )

Cass

There is no doubt Tack that there are hunting rounds out there with as good a BC as HPS. Two things though that would stop me or anyone from using them;

• With a hunting type bullet you generally have to go higher than the HPS target bullet to achieve the same BC. For example a 168 gr Hornady or 168gr Noslar BT would have a BC of about 0.445 the same as the HPS 155gr. So if you are using a 1:13 twist barrel/rifle that would like the lighter 155 gr, but may not like the heavier 168 or even 175 gr you could find yourself getting inconsistant groups, etc.
• The second would be (hate to repeat myself) the cost. Even buying HPS hunting rounds you are still looking at a price (per 50) of twice that of the HPS target stuff. So even from a plinking point of view it would in fact be cheaper for a hunter or target shooter to use the target ammo for plinking/zeroing, etc then switch to the hunting bullet for actual hunting. Now if i'm wrong on the price of Hornady i apologise, but they would have to be coming in at less than €52 per 50 (or €20 per 20) to be competitive, price wise.

I nort dismissing what you're saying merely trying to explain my opinion on the matter.

tac foley

'....................doesn't seem to have the legs out to the 1000yd)'

Well, shoooting from a 26" barrel it certainly won't - that's why target rifle barrels are 30" or longer.

tac

dCorbus

that's why target rifle barrels are 30" or longer

I think what you mean to say is that "most competitive custom target rifle barrels are 30'' or longer"?

My rifle is a target rifle and has a 26'' barrel - Or is this the exception that proves your point?;)

A longer barrel will certainly help me increase my scores (at least that's the plan;):D), but rest assured a 26'' barrel with good wind-reading skills will have no difficulty putting rounds into the 5 Ring at 1000yds (Pity my wind-reading skills are not yet up to the job!). Even without good wind-reading skills, she'll still send them downrange into the 4-5 at 1000yds without too much fuss and bother.

Yes, a 30-32'' barrel would be a better job - but not many factory rifles come with them.

On a slightly unrelated note, for someone who has the opinion that F-Class and Long-range Target Shooting is in some way "elitist" (why and who tells you this stuff, I don't know), posting misleading information which could lead a lad to not take up long-range target shooting due to barrel length issues etc., seems to be, in itself, to be the kind of elitism and arms-race attitude which you yourself have on previous occasions eluded to in others.

And now you've gone and got me all flustered and off-topic

ranger4

ezridax wrote: »

With a hunting bullet, perhaps, but as per the name of the forum we are refering to the target bullets. So it would be a no to them being moly coated.

Why not moly coated for Target work? with Less friction of naked bullets down bore and higher velocity with Less presure issues moly coated bullets are used for Target and special purpose Loadings.

tac foley

dCorbus wrote: »

I think what you mean to say is that "most competitive custom target rifle barrels are 30'' or longer"?

My rifle is a target rifle and has a 26'' barrel - Or is this the exception that proves your point?;)

A longer barrel will certainly help me increase my scores (at least that's the plan;):D), but rest assured a 26'' barrel with good wind-reading skills will have no difficulty putting rounds into the 5 Ring at 1000yds (Pity my wind-reading skills are not yet up to the job!). Even without good wind-reading skills, she'll still send them downrange into the 4-5 at 1000yds without too much fuss and bother.

Yes, a 30-32'' barrel would be a better job - but not many factory rifles come with them.

On a slightly unrelated note, for someone who has the opinion that F-Class and Long-range Target Shooting is in some way "elitist" (why and who tells you this stuff, I don't know), posting misleading information which could lead a lad to not take up long-range target shooting due to barrel length issues etc., seems to be, in itself, to be the kind of elitism and arms-race attitude which you yourself have on previous occasions eluded to in others.
And now you've gone and got me all flustered and off-topic

Sir - it's posts like this one if yours that make me wonder why I bother to get out of bed some mornings.

No, I don't have a target rifle.

No, I don't shoot target rifle.

BUT - I DO know a man who makes them, although with all the fine target rifle builders you have over in the RoI I doubt if his name means anything to you.

His name is Norman Clark.

He builds target rifles.

They ALL have barrels of around 30" or longer.

There were four of his rifles on our range today [two in 6.5-284, one in 6.5AI and one in .308Win. He is a member of our gun club - and all had either 30" or 32" barrels - designed to 'beat the bump' that the .308Win round seems to suffer, and ensure that the bullet is still supersonic at 900m/1000yds.

Look at a line-up at Bisley, and show me the 26" barrelled target rifles there.

As for 'seems to be, in itself, to be the kind of elitism and arms-race attitude which you yourself have on previous occasions eluded to in others' - I haven't the foggiest notion what you are talking about. I have absolutely no axe to grind where target rifle shooting of any kind is concerned, not having taken part in civilian-style target shooting for fun since I had all my semi-autos taken off me back in 1988. I have nothing but admiration for the dedication and application of those who shoot in this difficult discipline, at whatever level they take part. Perhaps you are confusing me with somebody else?

If you want to carry this on, please do it by PM....and by the way, your use of emoticons passes me by completely. As I've noted countless times before, I don't see them except as hollow squares so you could be laffing, frowning or simply taking the p*** for all I know.

tac

BTB - the word you are looking for is 'aluded' not 'eluded'. ;=)

Cass

ranger4 wrote: »

Why not moly coated for Target work?

Apologies. I will clarify.

The bullets currently available at the moment are the non moly coated variety. HPS do a line of moly coated bullets, such as the new 155 gr. They are ( i hesitate to use the word) specialist order.

Personally i (and most of the lads if not all that i shoot with) can and are getting good to great results with the non moly bullets. Also if only some of the bullet types are moly and a shooter wishes to change to a different type which does not come in moly then its a serious cleaning needed to remove any coating of the barrel and then recoating if you go back to the moly. Alot of unnecessary hassle for some (me included)

tac foley

ranger4 wrote: »

Why not moly coated for Target work? with Less friction of naked bullets down bore and higher velocity with Less presure issues moly coated bullets are used for Target and special purpose Loadings.

Many target rifle shooters in the rest of the world still use moly-coated bullets.

Three of the four on our range today, shooting-in their new barrels, were shooting moly-coated bullets.

tac

Sandy22

tac foley wrote: »

BTB - the word you are looking for is 'aluded' not 'eluded'. ;=)

BTB - the word you are looking for is 'alluded', not 'aluded'. Maybe the other 'l' eluded you. TTP

tac foley

Sandy22 wrote: »

BTB - the word you are looking for is 'alluded', not 'aluded'. Maybe the other 'l' eluded you. TTP

Thanks for reading.

'TTP'?

tac

Sparks

tac foley wrote: »

'TTP'?

Taking The mickey Perhaps?

fish slapped

:D:D So in short -- yes it's worth the 50 odd euro to try out a box of hps rounds !!

leupold90

To answer the original question and not get involved in a pointless p***ing contest about ballistics.

I've used 155g HPS and have found them to be every bit as good as other match grade rounds. At €50 a box they're about half the cost of Lapua, Hornady etc. Get a box and try them, you won't be disapointed.

Cass

Yes fish slapped in short they are completely worth it.

leupold90 wrote: »

To answer the original question and not get involved in a pointless p***ing contest about ballistics..

There is no p***ing contest going on here, merely a debate about the pros and cons of which is possibly better and for what reasons. Too many times people advise others of how good something is, but with no explanation as to why. Also in target shooting the more you understand about all aspects of the rifle, barrel, scope and MOST IMPORTANTLY the bullet the better you can adapt, change to get the best possible results.

ranger4

tac foley wrote: »

Many target rifle shooters in the rest of the world still use moly-coated bullets.

Three of the four on our range today, shooting-in their new barrels, were shooting moly-coated bullets.

tac

Shoot moly coated Bergers and coated Lapuas with my 308-243 barrels but will scrub out my 1 in 11 twist 308 barrel and try the 190g HPS Loading, anyone able to give FPS with the 190-200g HPS ammo, Thanks.

Cass

190 gr - 2745 fps (average)

200 gr - 2720 fps (average)


From a 1:12 twist, 30" barrel, and scope with 0.25 click value a "standard" drop chart would be as follows;


190 gr

100 ______ 200 ______ 300 _________ 500 ________ 600 _________ 800 __________ 900 ________ 1,000 ________ Yards

- 0

---

1

---

4.75

---

11.5

---

13.5

---

24.25

---

29.5

---

35.25

---

> MOA

- 0

---

4

---

19

---

46

---

54

---

97

---

118

---

141

---

> Clicks


200gr

100 ______ 200 ______ 300 _________ 500 ________ 600 _________ 800 __________ 900 ________ 1,000 _______ Yards

- 0

---

1

---

5

---

11.5

---

14

---

24.25

---

29.5

---

35.5

---

> MOA

- 0

---

4

---

20

---

46

---

56

---

97

---

118

---

142

---

> Clicks

Tackleberrywho

ezridax wrote: »

190 gr - 2745 fps (average)

200 gr - 2720 fps (average)


From a 1:12 twist, 30" barrel, and scope with 0.25 click value a "standard" drop chart would be as follows;


190 gr

100 ______ 200 ______ 300 _________ 500 ________ 600 _________ 800 __________ 900 ________ 1,000 ________ Yards

- 0

---

1

---

4.75

---

11.5

---

13.5

---

24.25

---

29.5

---

35.25

---

> MOA

- 0

---

4

---

19

---

46

---

54

---

97

---

118

---

141

---

> Clicks


200gr

100 ______ 200 ______ 300 _________ 500 ________ 600 _________ 800 __________ 900 ________ 1,000 _______ Yards

- 0

---

1

---

5

---

11.5

---

14

---

24.25

---

29.5

---

35.5

---

> MOA

- 0

---

4

---

20

---

46

---

56

---

97

---

118

---

142

---

> Clicks

In lay mans terms, what is the drop of the 200 grain @ 1000 yards just out of interest? (inches or feet)

and do you go from your 25yard zero?

ranger4

ezridax wrote: »

190 gr - 2745 fps (average)

200 gr - 2720 fps (average)


From a 1:12 twist, 30" barrel, and scope with 0.25 click value a "standard" drop chart would be as follows;


190 gr

100 ______ 200 ______ 300 _________ 500 ________ 600 _________ 800 __________ 900 ________ 1,000 ________ Yards

- 0

---

1

---

4.75

---

11.5

---

13.5

---

24.25

---

29.5

---

35.25

---

> MOA

- 0

---

4

---

19

---

46

---

54

---

97

---

118

---

141

---

> Clicks


200gr

100 ______ 200 ______ 300 _________ 500 ________ 600 _________ 800 __________ 900 ________ 1,000 _______ Yards

- 0

---

1

---

5

---

11.5

---

14

---

24.25

---

29.5

---

35.5

---

> MOA

- 0

---

4

---

20

---

46

---

56

---

97

---

118

---

142

---

> Clicks

Thanks for info, Wonder is the powder used for the lighter 155-175g matchking HPS offerings N140 and for the heavier 180g+ bullets N150.

Cass

ranger4 wrote: »

.........., Wonder is the powder used for the lighter 155-175g matchking HPS offerings N140 and for the heavier 180g+ bullets N150.

I would imagine the powder used for the 155 gr is definitely N140 as Vihtavuoru is/seems to be his powder of choice. Trying to find exact info on the bullet make up is hard as Carmichael does not advertise what his loads are. I'm assuming he is using a slower burning powder for the heavier loads to guarantee stability during flight. The BC of the heavier bullets helps maintain its speed at the longer distances.

Again this is all assumption/SWAG as the only man to accurately answer these questions would be Carmihael himself. Is he a member here and we'll ask him?

Tackleberrywho wrote:

In lay mans terms, what is the drop of the 200 grain @ 1000 yards just out of interest? (inches or feet)..........

A rudimentary way of converting MOA to actual measurable units is to multiply the MOA you know for a distance by the the amount of inches per MOA for that distance and then divide by 12 (as in inches per foot) to give you the drop in feet.

Example:

You have 11.5 MOA at 500 yds for a 200 gr bullet.
You have 5 inches per 1 MOA (4 clicks) at 500 yards.

So 11.5 x 5 = 57.5 /divided by 12 (inches per foot) and you get 4.79 feet.

Put all the info into a ballistics calculator and at 500 yds you get 56.5 inches or 4.71 feet.

.............and do you go from your 25yard zero?

What 25 yd zero? I keep a 100 yd zero on the rifle at all times. Maybe you are refering to the 25 yd SAFETY zero that all shooters must use before being allowed to fire on the windmill range.

ranger4

I would imagine the powder used for the 155 gr is definitely N140 as Vihtavuoru is/seems to be his powder of choice. Trying to find exact info on the bullet make up is hard as Carmichael does not advertise what his loads are. I'm assuming he is using a slower burning powder for the heavier loads to guarantee stability during flight. The BC of the heavier bullets helps maintain its speed at the longer distances.


Would also imagine N150 or similar single based propellent would be used with 180g+ weight bullets rather than a Large charge weight of double based propellent such as N550 which would Lead to a compressed charge when seating to standard OAL.

dCorbus

Wasn't sure about responding to an earlier post, but for the sake of setting the record straight, I felt I'd "exercise my right to reply";):D (that's a wink and a smilie).

Tac, IMO your post from yesterday evening was possibly one of the most condescending (Did I spell that good, sir?) that I've read on here in a very long while and therefore I didn't feel that it could be left to stand without a response.

So here we go (and apologies in advance for going off the reservation on this one):

Sir - it's posts like this one if yours that make me wonder why I bother to get out of bed some mornings.

Sheesh, tac, you really need to get out more if my posts make you wonder why you bother to get out of bed some mornings. Seriously. No mans posts should make another man that distraught.:D (smiley face grin)

No, I don't have a target rifle.

No, I don't shoot target rifle.

You don't?
Eh?
I'm confused? (little icon of confused man)

To quote from one of your previous posts on another thread:

I have a twenty-five-year old Krico 650S in .308Win, and an even older K31-actioned TR with a Schultz & Larsen barrel

So, which is it? Do you have a Target Rifle or do you not?

I DO know a man who makes them, although with all the fine target rifle builders you have over in the RoI I doubt if his name means anything to you.

His name is Norman Clark.

He builds target rifles.

Please do your fellow posters the courtesy of refraining from such condescending comments, if you don't mind.

Some of us in the Little Ol' RoI do in fact know something about something - and of course, I and many others are well aware of who Norman Clark is. And, gee wiz, some of us even have seen and, lo', have touched such Norman Clark rifles.

So, please get down off your high horse.

They ALL have barrels of around 30" or longer.

There were four of his rifles on our range today [two in 6.5-284, one in 6.5AI and one in .308Win. He is a member of our gun club - and all had either 30" or 32" barrels - designed to 'beat the bump' that the .308Win round seems to suffer, and ensure that the bullet is still supersonic at 900m/1000yds.

So what you really meant to say in your previous post was that all Fullbore TR Target Rifles manufactured by Norman Clark that you are familiar with from your club, range, and experience all have 30'' or longer barrels?

Not exactly the same thing as stating that "target rifle barrels are 30" or longer", is it?

I can only presume that you are posting about Fullbore Target Rifles (capital T, capital R - otherwise referred to on occassion as TR rifles, Palma Rifles, Bisley Rifles, etc.) - the OP was asking, and I was referring to target rifles (lower case t, lower case r - i.e. those rifles intended for use shooting targets, and not the very specific case of TR to which you refer).

You are 100% correct (AFAIK) that Norman Clark Fullbore TR rifles and pretty much every Fullbore TR / Palma rifle I've ever seen or heard about has at least a 30'' barrel - but that was not what I was referring to nor was it the type of rifle or shooting to which the OP was referring to either.

Fish slapped refers to his AI and whether the HPS 155gr 308's would be good or not.

(Of course, AFAIK there's nothing to stop fish slapped from setting up his AI as a TR rifle and I will happily stand corrected if in fact this is his intention)

Look at a line-up at Bisley, and show me the 26" barrelled target rifles there.

Last time I checked there was more that one range on the planet - Bisley ain't the only one, as I'm sure you know.

And, to which particular event at Bisley are you referring? I presume the Imperial - but, hey, there's other events, shoots, competitions, etc. held in Bisley (or so one is led to believe - sometimes we do recieve information in little ol' Ireland from the Mainland, soir, your lordship, top o' the mornin' to ya:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::D - Lots of Icons indicating Major Sarcasm and a Smiley Grinned Face for good measure, in case you can't see emoticons over there across the Waters.)

Are you now going to tell us that a 26'' barrelled rifle has never shot a target in Bisley or on any other target range in the UK or elsewhere?

Perhaps you are confusing me with somebody else?

I don't believe I am.

If you want to carry this on, please do it by PM

Public posts should be addressed publicly IMO

And lastly, next time you feel the need to correct my spelling - please, at least get your own spelling correct.

dC

bunny shooter

Who said target shooters are/aren't elitist

Mr.Flibble

ezridax wrote: »

A rudimentary way of converting MOA to actual measurable units is to multiply the MOA you know for a distance by the the amount of inches per MOA for that distance and then divide by 12 (as in inches per foot) to give you the drop in feet.

Example:

You have 11.5 MOA at 500 yds for a 200 gr bullet.
You have 5 inches per 1 MOA (4 clicks) at 500 yards.

So 11.5 x 5 = 57.5 /divided by 12 (inches per foot) and you get 4.79 feet.

Put all the info into a ballistics calculator and at 500 yds you get 56.5 inches or 4.71 feet.

What a convoluted way of not answering the question!

The answer is c.31 feet

Cass

Mr.Flibble wrote: »

What a convoluted way of not answering the question!

The answer is c.31 feet

Did you use the method i gave to work that out?

I thought i'd give Tackleberrywho a way to work out the drop in feet for himself. I don't see him complaining.

Cass

ranger4 wrote: »

Would also imagine N150 or similar single based propellent would be used with 180g+ weight bullets rather than a Large charge weight of double based propellent such as N550 which would Lead to a compressed charge when seating to standard OAL.

I'll happily cede to your higher knowledge of powder/bullet loads. Your statement verges on a knowledge of reloading which i must admit i'm a virgin to and in no position to either agree or debate the point with you. My understanding of HPS comes mainly from alot of use and reading as much info on them that i can.

Tackleberrywho

ezridax wrote: »

Did you use the method i gave to work that out?

I thought i'd give Tackleberrywho a way to work out the drop in feet for himself. I don't see him complaining.

Thanks Ezri, you answered what was asked
I am not very familiar with MOA as I rarely shoot out past 400yards with the .223.
I have a hunting .308 so I doubt I'll be shooting out past 300 with it either.

I would like to test the .223 out to 600, just to see what she could do.
However you may help me out with the 25yard safety zeroing as I have never done that.(it's prob fairly simple, but I would like to be shown the right way)
I do appreciate that the 55grain ammo may be too feeble to group @600 (but for a bit of craic it would be interesting)

Cass

MOA is not a hard thing to understand Tack. Its 4 clicks (assuming you have a 1/4 click value scope). So the table for the different distances would look as follows:

• 100 yards - 1 click = 1/4 inch. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 1 inch @ 100 yards.
• 200 yards - 1 click = 1/2 inch. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 2 inches @ 200 yards.
• 300 yards - 1 click = 3/4 inch. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 3 inch @ 300 yards.
• 400 yards - 1 click = 1 inch. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 4 inches @ 400 yards.
• 500 yards - 1 click = 1+1/4 inches. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 5 inch @ 500 yards.
• 600 yards - 1 click = 1+1/2 inches. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 6 inches @ 600 yards.
• 700 yards - 1 click = 1+3/4 inches. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 7 inch @ 700 yards.
• 800 yards - 1 click = 2 inches. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 8 inches @ 800 yards.
• 900 yards - 1 click = 2+1/4 inches. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 9 inch @ 900 yards.
• 1,000 yards - 1 click = 2+1/2 inches. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 10 inches @ 1,000 yards.

One thing i always say, and i don't know how "true" it is, but it makes sense is, the click value of a scope is not a 100% indicator, but a guide. To explain that, if you are firing at 300 yards and you are 6 inches low. According to the table above you should have to click up 8 clicks or 2 MOA. You do this and fire again and you are 1/2 inch high. The idea of the scope clicks are to give you an accurate (as possible) guide to how many clicks/MOA you must adjust the scope to hit your target. Otherwise you would be clicking up/down/left/right without any real idea of effect on the bullets POI.

Remember not every rifle or bullet will act the same or to the same "rules" as the scope does because of twist rates, barrel length, MV, etc, etc.

Tackleberrywho

ezridax wrote: »

MOA is not a hard thing to understand Tack. Its 4 clicks (assuming you have a 1/4 click value scope). So the table for the different distances would look as follows:

• 100 yards - 1 click = 1/4 inch. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 1 inch @ 100 yards.
• 200 yards - 1 click = 1/2 inch. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 2 inches @ 200 yards.
• 300 yards - 1 click = 3/4 inch. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 3 inch @ 300 yards.
• 400 yards - 1 click = 1 inch. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 4 inches @ 400 yards.
• 500 yards - 1 click = 1+1/4 inches. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 5 inch @ 500 yards.
• 600 yards - 1 click = 1+1/2 inches. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 6 inches @ 600 yards.
• 700 yards - 1 click = 1+3/4 inches. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 7 inch @ 700 yards.
• 800 yards - 1 click = 2 inches. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 8 inches @ 800 yards.
• 900 yards - 1 click = 2+1/4 inches. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 9 inch @ 900 yards.
• 1,000 yards - 1 click = 2+1/2 inches. So 4 clicks or 1 MOA = 10 inches @ 1,000 yards.

Remember not every rifle or bullet will act the same or to the same "rules" as the scope does because of twist rates, barrel length, MV, etc, etc.

Right, I've never shot 500 to cal bullet drop, but the Hornady drop for 300 and 400 seems to work well enough in my rifler set up.(24" Hornady Vs my 26" 1/12 Remmy barrel)

Would you trust the MOA reticles on NF more than the clicks, I don't normally click (as I found I was hitting high) so your theory works.
My NXS 8-32 Reticle has 2MOA @100. I was using the second or third line down when shooting the .223 (with a 200 yard zero) @ 300 - 400

I'd be afraid clicking that I would forget to click back to my zero point if shooting at the same distance for a while

The vertical line of the NP-R2 reticle is divided into 2 M.O.A. increments (approx. 2 inches at 100 yards). These vertical increments are used for range estimation, multiple zero points and accurate bullet drop compensation. Any size target can be easily ranged using a simple formula: (target size in inches ÷ M.O.A. x 100 = range in yards). Once range is determined select an appropriate hold point based on the bullet drop of your cartridge. The vertical spacings can easily be split into 1 M.O.A. increments further enhancing long-range accuracy. The horizontal line is divided into equal 5 M.O.A. increments for windage compensation.


I've never really used the NF reticle system to it's full potential, it would be nice to see what she can do when pushed.

Cass

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Would you trust the MOA reticles on NF more than the clicks, I don't normally click (as I found I was hitting high) so your theory works.

Yes i would, but i rarely use them simply because i've shot the distances and gotten my exact clicks for that distance.

My NXS 8-32 Reticle has 2MOA @100. I was using the second or third line down when shooting the .223 (with a 200 yard zero) @ 300 - 400

Remember that the ranging lines on a NF scope only work when the scope is set to its ranging magnification. For an 8-32 scope that would be 22 power. Any other magnification setting would give you more or less than 2MOA at 100 yards.

I'd be afraid clicking that I would forget to click back to my zero point if shooting at the same distance for a while

Thats why i get my 100 yard zero then remove the turret and set it to zero. This would work great or better for you as if you are shooting out to 400 yards max (for the time being) you would need no more than 10 MOA. So if you got your 100 yard zero, clicked up for the necessary distance shot at that distance for a while when you want to go back to your 100 yard zero you simply dial the scope/turret back down to "zero" setting on the turret.

The vertical line of the NP-R2 reticle is divided into 2 M.O.A. increments (approx. 2 inches at 100 yards). These vertical increments are used for range estimation, multiple zero points and accurate bullet drop compensation. Any size target can be easily ranged using a simple formula: (target size in inches ÷ M.O.A. x 100 = range in yards). Once range is determined select an appropriate hold point based on the bullet drop of your cartridge. The vertical spacings can easily be split into 1 M.O.A. increments further enhancing long-range accuracy. The horizontal line is divided into equal 5 M.O.A. increments for windage compensation.

From NF's website? Its a good solution and obviously there is no better a source of how to work the scope than from the manufacturer themselves. Only problem is guessing the size of the target. Also you need to know what your bullet drop is in order to adjust your hold point. If you haven't shot at various ranges then you will not know your bullet drop so again the ranging lines become useless to you. Again i do not need this as i have my clicks/MOA for all my distances and as i do target shooting these distances are a constant, hence never change.

I've never really used the NF reticle system to it's full potential, it would be nice to see what she can do when pushed.

I love NF scopes. They are cheaper than some other higher end scopes, easier to use, reliable, accurate and come with a lifetime warranty. They are fully capable of any action you want to carry out at most any distance. I rarely use the ranging lines (hash marks) so i cannot go into depth on their usefulness however i would assume based on the excellent performance of the scope and its clicks/MOA accuracy that they would work just as well.

Next time you are in the club i'll take you down and run through the 25yd zero and see where it goes from there. Try the .308 also. Having a full and "real world" drop chart for 100 - 600yds would be handy to have.

Vegeta

The Nightforce reticles are in the second focal plane so the range estimation and therefore MOA only work as indicated at the magnification marked R on the scope magnification power ring.

Also the Nightforce target turrets can be loosened and re-set to 0 when you are zeroed. That way if you do forget to dial down all you do is look at the turret and if it is not zero then you're not on zero.



Ahhh too slow ezridax got there before me and with a much more detailed answer