Rastoff
US Veteran
Yes, setting aside the semantics, the 14.5" barrel is competent out to 300 yards. It's when you get beyond those distances that barrel length (really bullet speed) becomes really important.
are mp sport 2 rifles sub moa capable ?
- Thread starter rodney winston
- Start date
jimbo728
Member
Yes to MOA question. I know my Sport can do it if I do my part.
It surprises me with its accuracy almost every time out.
Jim
It surprises me with its accuracy almost every time out.
Jim
ChattanoogaPhil
Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2009
- Messages
- 14,601
- Reaction score
- 20,622
Barrel length, velocity, ammo and effectiveness are all about the intended purpose.
My rifle is for offhand CQB. I live in the thick woods of Tennessee.
I use 5.56 NATO Fed M855. I chose it for close range light barrier penetration characteristics. Rated muzzle velocity is 3020fps from a 20in barrel.
I use a 16in 1-7 barrel that delivers a 2928fps avg muzzle velocity measured with my chronograph. An effective lethal wound channel (M855 ain't the best anyway) is supposed to be at or above 2500fps. I'm at 2500fps at 150yds. A 20in barrel would be at 175yds. With my red dot I'm good for point and click shooting to about 200yds. It's about 2moa ammo. So everything is in the ballpark I'm looking for.
Now I could use PMC X-Tac that has the same projectile but with a rated velocity of 3100fps. With my 16in barrel, X-Tac would deliver about the same velocity as a 20in barrel with the Fed I'm using. Illustrates how ammo choices can nullify barrel length. Choices choices.... Fed availability is much better and I can find it at some significant discounts so it works for me.
The "effectiveness" over 300yds 20in vs 16in? My 16in will have a calculated velocity of about 1837 at 400yds. A 20in barrel about 1907fps. An effectiveness difference of a big yawn with the ammo and designated use of my rifle.
With a 14.5in barrel I'm guessing you'd probably give up another 40-50fps muzzle velocity over a 16in barrel. Never measured one.
So what barrel and ammo do you guys choose and why?
My rifle is for offhand CQB. I live in the thick woods of Tennessee.
I use 5.56 NATO Fed M855. I chose it for close range light barrier penetration characteristics. Rated muzzle velocity is 3020fps from a 20in barrel.
I use a 16in 1-7 barrel that delivers a 2928fps avg muzzle velocity measured with my chronograph. An effective lethal wound channel (M855 ain't the best anyway) is supposed to be at or above 2500fps. I'm at 2500fps at 150yds. A 20in barrel would be at 175yds. With my red dot I'm good for point and click shooting to about 200yds. It's about 2moa ammo. So everything is in the ballpark I'm looking for.
Now I could use PMC X-Tac that has the same projectile but with a rated velocity of 3100fps. With my 16in barrel, X-Tac would deliver about the same velocity as a 20in barrel with the Fed I'm using. Illustrates how ammo choices can nullify barrel length. Choices choices.... Fed availability is much better and I can find it at some significant discounts so it works for me.
The "effectiveness" over 300yds 20in vs 16in? My 16in will have a calculated velocity of about 1837 at 400yds. A 20in barrel about 1907fps. An effectiveness difference of a big yawn with the ammo and designated use of my rifle.
With a 14.5in barrel I'm guessing you'd probably give up another 40-50fps muzzle velocity over a 16in barrel. Never measured one.
So what barrel and ammo do you guys choose and why?
Last edited:
Arik
Member
IMI 77gr....
Maddmax
US Veteran
You are correct. It IS quite capable of doing it with the right ammo AND a shooter that did/does his homework and is also using the proper shooting techniques, like shoulder placement of the buttstock, cheek placement, proper grip, finger placement, trigger control, breathing... Then there's the sight alignment getting that front sight post dead center in that rear ring or groove lined up on the target.
Last edited:
jimbo728
Member
All that and one thing more. Luck. But that holds true with most everything.
Jim
Jim
Maybe try both and compare results.I haven't done extensive testing with my Sport. But from what I've seen it shoots very accurate at 35 yards. I was cutting blades of grass in two with every shot pretty much. It wasn't regular grass it was a tall type of grass that was planted as ornamental stuff. But the individual blades of grass are similar to what you might see in a field, not a yard. Still to shoot that well is pretty darn good. I was aiming with a laser I have mounted currently. I haven't put a scope on it yet. That will be needed to really see the capability for 100 yard accuracy. And most lesser powered scopes aren't really good enough to let you know just how accurate your rifle is. You can't expect sub-MOA groups when you're using a scope that blocks out a bigger area than that at 100 yards. You need a target type scope with high power to really know the ultimate capability of your rifle. The fact I have the A2 sight on my Sport may be a factor with a high power scope. I just don't know. Some here probably do. It seems like the scope will be on a high axis compared to your average bolt action rifle. I have shot this rifle at 175 yards and it was doing minute of man quite easily with iron sights. That's all I expect from the rifle anyway and that was the first day I shot it at that distance. I'm about to do some more of that today if the wind isn't bad.
You also need a pile of different types of ammo so you can find which one your individual rifle likes. And you need lots of time and patience to work through all those things. Knowing which type of grip works best comes into play. Some shoot better if held tightly to the shoulder. Others shoot better with a loose hold. Cheek weld is important. And doing it the same way every time when you learn where to put your cheek is also very important.
Determining the ultimate accuracy of any rifle is a long process IMO. It requires doing things you aren't likely going to do on a permanent basis. Who wants a 36X scope on an AR? But I learned long ago that it takes a scope of that power with high quality glass to really tell you what you need to know.
Mostly it just takes practice. If you want to know it will take lots of practice.
My suggestion is to go with what the rifle is intended to do. To be honest what I'm hearing here makes me think my SKS is very similar when it comes to the accuracy of this rifle. I just don't believe that though. What I know for sure is that as well as my SKS has worked over the years swapping mags with that rifle is a tricky move especially if I was under pressure. Plus that rifle gets really hot, really fast. There are many advantages of the AR system, trust me. But I've shot some high quality AR's at the range including an AR-10 with lots of mods intended to give it better accuracy and it didn't come close to the accuracy of my .223 Savage 12 LRPV. That's not to say it wasn't accurate. It was. But if accuracy is your thing buy a good bolt action rifle. That Savage cost double what my AR cost BTW. It's one of the best Savage makes.
Still I expect this Sport to be plenty accurate. Most accuracy is in trigger pull anyway. If you can master that, and it can be done even on bad triggers, you'll be 90% of the way to being accurate.
You also need a pile of different types of ammo so you can find which one your individual rifle likes. And you need lots of time and patience to work through all those things. Knowing which type of grip works best comes into play. Some shoot better if held tightly to the shoulder. Others shoot better with a loose hold. Cheek weld is important. And doing it the same way every time when you learn where to put your cheek is also very important.
Determining the ultimate accuracy of any rifle is a long process IMO. It requires doing things you aren't likely going to do on a permanent basis. Who wants a 36X scope on an AR? But I learned long ago that it takes a scope of that power with high quality glass to really tell you what you need to know.
Mostly it just takes practice. If you want to know it will take lots of practice.
My suggestion is to go with what the rifle is intended to do. To be honest what I'm hearing here makes me think my SKS is very similar when it comes to the accuracy of this rifle. I just don't believe that though. What I know for sure is that as well as my SKS has worked over the years swapping mags with that rifle is a tricky move especially if I was under pressure. Plus that rifle gets really hot, really fast. There are many advantages of the AR system, trust me. But I've shot some high quality AR's at the range including an AR-10 with lots of mods intended to give it better accuracy and it didn't come close to the accuracy of my .223 Savage 12 LRPV. That's not to say it wasn't accurate. It was. But if accuracy is your thing buy a good bolt action rifle. That Savage cost double what my AR cost BTW. It's one of the best Savage makes.
Still I expect this Sport to be plenty accurate. Most accuracy is in trigger pull anyway. If you can master that, and it can be done even on bad triggers, you'll be 90% of the way to being accurate.
Last edited:
OP
rodney winston
Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2016
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 1
for anybody looking for a good source on trajectories of various calibers look up gunnersden they have done alot of work plotting bullet trajectories that is why i go with 200 yard zero it generally works very well with anything i might plink at.....gonna get some match grade ammo and try another go at the range see if i can shrink my groups a lil
ChattanoogaPhil
Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2009
- Messages
- 14,601
- Reaction score
- 20,622
There is typically little difference in trajectories among even very different factory loads.
For example. Here is a 40gr Cor-bon BlitzKing compared to the 62gr Federal ammo I shoot. Very different animals.
Take a look at the graph and "Drop Inches" column A&B. Ask yourself if you would really know the difference.
Even some .308 compared to 5.56 there is little difference. In fact, the bullet drop reticles on some scopes are identical for these two calibers. Primary Arms ACSS reticle is advertised for both .308 and 5.56.
Gun data.org is a good tool.
For example. Here is a 40gr Cor-bon BlitzKing compared to the 62gr Federal ammo I shoot. Very different animals.
Take a look at the graph and "Drop Inches" column A&B. Ask yourself if you would really know the difference.
Even some .308 compared to 5.56 there is little difference. In fact, the bullet drop reticles on some scopes are identical for these two calibers. Primary Arms ACSS reticle is advertised for both .308 and 5.56.
Gun data.org is a good tool.
Last edited:
OP
rodney winston
Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2016
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 1
i do a lot of hunting mostly use 7mm.. gunnersden sets up practial shooting for say 7mm on whitetail deer kill zone is 4 inches so sugesstion is with 1.5 inch scope center to barrel center basic medium mount calculates roughly1.7 in high 100 yards 1.3 high 200 yards 240 yard zero and 3.3 inch low 300 yards so inside of 280 yards the bullet is never more than 2 inches high or low gives good platform for most shooting distances.. 223 ballistics are very simmiliar for most basic shooting i totaly agree 50 yards is good to zero gun in at just saying if 50 is first zero somewhere between 160 to 220 the bullet should re-zero so were kind of in the same ballpark on zero i just look for the second zero at 200 and the origional 50 yard zero will be within 1/4 in high or low
I got to shoot my Sport a few times yesterday. I was shooting at about 80 yards and it was hitting very tight groups considering I was shooting with the stock sights. I thought it was plenty accurate. I would have to do several things to figure out the ultimate accuracy but for what this rifle is designed to do it seems plenty accurate.
Maddmax
US Veteran
Nothing wrong with using irons
And for those who use optics, for the love of God, please make sure that your irons are zeroed..
In all reality, Iron Sights are where beginners need to start, get proficient with and master first.
I never owned a scope until I bought a Marlin 60 that came with one in about 1992. I was in my mid-30's at the time. We just didn't have much use for one the way we saw things. We hunted small game that moves a lot (squirrels) and finding a running squirrel with a scope is almost impossible. A WWII sniper taught us a lot about shooting when we were kids. He never used a scope. He didn't like them at all. But I saw him drop a crow from 300 yards with iron sights. He taught us that if you can see it you can shoot it and you really don't need a scope. For his purposes I'm sure he didn't have need of a scope. He wasn't making 1000 yard shots in the war. He was likely in a tree or a tower picking off humans who were running. Again that would have been easier with irons.
I like my scopes now because I like shooting long distances and I like shooting tiny groups on targets. Both generally require a scope IMO. At least for me they do. But I do know how to use the irons.
I like my scopes now because I like shooting long distances and I like shooting tiny groups on targets. Both generally require a scope IMO. At least for me they do. But I do know how to use the irons.
Rastoff
US Veteran
I hear this a lot, but I don't agree with it. The fundamentals are the same with optics or irons. How is "mastering" irons the right way to go?
ChattanoogaPhil
Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2009
- Messages
- 14,601
- Reaction score
- 20,622
The fundamentals of lining up front and rear sights for aiming as well as adjusting front and rear sights are significantly different compared to a scope with a turret and arrow pointing hey dummy turn this way to go up. Ever seen someone at the range get that puzzled look on their face when it comes to which way to adjust irons to get point of impact to move the way they want? The art of shooting with both eyes open with irons following a moving target is a lot different than just sitting at a bench peering through a 20x optic with one eye closed trying to hit a bullseye, or the ease of using a 1x red dot that is forgiving of a less than disciplined cheek weld. Some ARs have an elevation adjustable rear sight so you got to know the right method to zero. Heck, there's people who come here just to figure out how to mechanically adjust an A2 front sight post. I can't remember anyone ever asking how to turn a scope turret. There's a lot of distinct and fundamental differences and beyond what I've mentioned.
Now I might not use the term "master", but a fundamental knowledge and ability to use the equipment that comes with the rifle like a Sport makes good sense before moving on to a Tactical Death Ray Power Zoom Kaleidoscope.
Of course when you get old and half blind like me those irons play less of a role...
Now I might not use the term "master", but a fundamental knowledge and ability to use the equipment that comes with the rifle like a Sport makes good sense before moving on to a Tactical Death Ray Power Zoom Kaleidoscope.
Of course when you get old and half blind like me those irons play less of a role...
Last edited:
Magload
US Veteran
Well when I keep both eyes open I get two front sights and keep forgetting which is the right one I am supposed to be using.
Rastoff
US Veteran
Yes, I'm aware of how irons work. Most adjustable iron sights have markings telling which way to turn them as well. It's just that most don't read them. Even the A2 has an arrow telling which way to turn it.
My question was, why do they have to learn the irons first? What value is it? Even with the less-than-desirable cheek weld when using a red dot, is not detrimental to using the red dot. How will using the irons make them a better user of a scope or red dot?
Similar threads
