Total Vindication.

[Brett248Vista]

That looks fantastic! Love that LaRue mount. I really should ditch
the ARMS mounts on my ACOG ECOS and RX30 they stink compared to
LaRue and American Defense.

 

[sithlord]

To clear this up in my mind then, I can have a zeroed (accurate ) rifle and I can be a precise marksman when placing my shots, (using an optic) that helps me to see previous hits,
but should not be able to combine the tool and the skill to shoot a group of 1/2 inch or a group of 3/4 inch? At approx 70yds?

You can be both accurate and precise. If you can draw a circle with a 3/4" radius, and all of your holes are COMPLETELY within that circle, and your distance is 70 yards, then you, my friend, have shot 1 MOA or better. And that is FANTASTIC with the S&W 15-22.

I will when I get the chance post some targets to satisfy those that need it, but as a rule I don't have a stock as I use the rifle for field shooting and fun. The precision stuff I normally use my CZ silhouette which is the match grade rifle as you will no doubt be aware.

Pics, or it didn't happen! It's the old addage - trust but verify.

I think I get the idea of MOA but TBH the technical stuff means little to me as I work on what I am able to achieve not what a technical manual says I should be able to do.

I don't think the manual says that it's a 2-4 MOA rifle. That is the expectation based on a variety of factors. These numbers hold up for the general population of tens of thousands of these rifles, with millions of rounds of ammo.

The mathematical definition of MOA does not change; I'm sure you've heard of 'degrees, minutes and seconds', eg, for degrees of latitude/longitude? 1 'minute' is simply 1/60th of 1 degree, or a VERY SMALL angle.

I've attached some thumbnails to help...

Also, here's a link with a lot more information:
Minute of Angle Definition and Why Understanding MOA is Important

All I know is what I can do with mine. And it works for me with a good optic. I'm not a professional shooter or world class by any stretch of the imagination.

Though I do class my self as competent and confident in my own ability, just as many posters on here are of the VERY technical ILK with regard to weapon specs and tech knowledge.

I guess again there will be some incoming so will wait for that while I get some targets and find the time to go shoot them ( what a pain having to shoot to provide evidence of own ability ) but if I must do so then when I can I will.

Until then, for all owners and shooters and tech minded or not, load shoot load shoot = enjoy!!!!

Indeed, again, congrats, and enjoy. Mighty fine looking rifle!

 

[UncaGrunny]

To me, it kind of makes sense to have your sights be as-good-or-better than the rifle's accuracy.

The reverse situation would have you sacrificing, whereas nothing but good can come of accurate sighting.

Errors are cumulative, after all.

 

[brucev]

Re: OP. Congratulations! Wonderful when a plan comes together and produces the desired results!

 

[Vinney47]

Again, I don't want to rain on the parade of the man who just put together a nice looking rifle of top quality parts.

I just have issue with the concept that putting a $1200 optic on the rifle somehow changes fundamentally what the barrel, bolt and other parts of the rifle are capable of. 3 MOA rifle shoots... 3 MOA. Doesn't matter if the hubble telescope is mounted to it.

Congrats again to the OP on the ACOG, but lets be reasonable here on the results.

 

[trololol]

I am gobsmacked by that setup! You must be minted
All this doubt here has given me the collywobbles. I find his grouping not at all barmy. I believe everything on the net I sure wish I could afford an Acog though but im having hard lines in the phosphate industry right now. Anyway sorry to waffle on
Cheers from San Serriffe!

 

[Rob1]

Hi Guys,

It would seem my choice of optic has caused a bit of a stir. Ease bare with me as I put this all into perspective from my stand point. After that feel free to agree or disagree depending on your own personal view.

To make this understandable for you all I will attempt to convert to USD where possible.

Cost of rifle for me in the UK was £750 = USD 1250 at the time.

Cost of spare mags is variable from £35 to £40 depending where and what colour. FDE almost impossible and cost extra.

Cost of a P/T charging handle was £67 inc tax import etc ( even though was eventually refused as unavailable)

Cost of a second hand ACOG and mount was £600 so I guess somewhere around the USD 1000 mark.

Now to set the scene. As you will have seen from other posts I was looking for advice as to an EOTech or if cost was prohibitive maybe a mil style optics. Received many helpful and constructive comments on said post ( EoTech 553)

Was then offered a deal that included the following; ACOG and mount, 2 x FDE mags, 1 x Tacticool Charge Handle ( new and unused) 1 bag of 30 XTM rail covers ( not PTS) and a magpul sling loop in FDE. All of this was in exchange for a ride on lawn mower that I paid £500 or about 650 USD for about 2 years ago and was no longer using. The only caveat to this was that I delivered, which of course I did.

Can ANYONE here on this forum HONESTLY say they would have turned down such a trade???? Even though the sight is way above what would normally be expected to be seen on a 15-22.

Other aspects to keep in mind even when buying small item like the Gripp loops for the mag bases. Ten of these cost me nearly 100 USD once I paid parts shipping and import tax. So to me the cost of this build / set up is relative. Every single aspect of this is EXPENSIVE except from the ammo. But this again is relative because of the sheer volume that can be used. As an example. Set of 4 XTM panels for the rail come in at about 25 USD approx.

Sorry for the long rambling post but it sometimes takes me a while to fully explain all facts. Though why I am apologising for explaining why I made a choice of how I did a trade to improve a rifle purchase is quiet frankly beyond me.

For those that agree with end result thanks fellas. Glad you like. For those that don't, you are entitled to your opinions.

I will when I get the chance post some pics for the doubters. As for the comments for or against thank you for sharing.

I now leave it to you guys to share or keep your opinions depending on how strong or not you feel about them.

Regards

Mark.

 

[sithlord]

Mark -

I don't think ANYONE is suggesting you did not get an ACE trade. I would take it as more jealousy than anything else that they haven't been offered similar, even here across the pond. The ACOG alone is worth it, but a 15-22 rifle that shoots tight groupings is just gravy.

I'm sorry if I came across as a 'hater'/'doubter'.

Be safe, keep shooting!

 

[CJ45lc]

Like I said before, I'm glad YOU got YOUR rifle set up the way YOU want it PERIOD.

And to be honest I am a little jealous about the great trade you made lol

 

[roadkill45]

and as i stated GREAT TRADE!!! I tend to keep a couple of trader guns that i don't like, use for trading purposes. You got a great deal and the guy you traded to can mow in comfort (did it come with a pint holder?)

I have an EOTech EXPS-0 w/G33 magnifier on my 15-22, 2-Schmidt and Bender short dots w/LaRue mounts, one 1.1-4 on a CAR 15 and the bigger 3-25 on my .308 M24'gery. both of those sights are in the $2500-$3000 range on a much less expensive rifle, heck the Leupold on my hunting rig cost more also.
I like good glass, i have 'old eyes' and the scopes help. you have a great gun and shoot well so i take you at your word, don't need any pics for me!
i'm thinking about selling off one of my upper end scopes for Lasik surgery to fix my old eyes. tired of wearing glasses.

great shooting, keep it up. too bad the prices are so over inflated in the UK.

 

[jbarchitect68]

Don't forget he can pull that acog off and put it on another gun.
I take mine off my POF and put it on my KSG for turkey and deer season.

But a group is 5 shots. I don't want to see any 3 shot groups.
If you post a sub moa group I will personally declare you king.

 

[Ibmikey]

Unlike some of the ballistic experts and Doubting Thomas' (is that a British cliché ?) I read the forums for entertainment and to see what others are doing with their firearms. I too have an optic on my 15-22 that equals the price of the "gun" (rifle) but I also have a $1200 AR with a $2000 night vision...point is it is ok to set up a garden tractor or a Midnight hog shooter any way you like and because we live (most of us anyway) in the free part of the United States we can do that.
I also think it is neat that a discussion of this type is spanning the ocean in friendship because of the shooting sport. End of rant

 

[Racefan3n88]

IMO, I think what caused the stir was your claim of 1/4" to 1/2" groups at 70 yards.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

I don't see any need for heartburn over a high-dollar optic on a 15-22.

To begin with, it's designed for an AR platform which is a lot more than can be said for the some of the cockamamie setups I have seen on this Forum. Top-shelf optics typically hold a great deal of their value compared to dime store optics which are worth about nothing used. Sounds like he got a good deal on the ACOG, and in the long run probably cost less than a dime store optic which often find their way to the parts box. While some folks struggle with distorted optics and proclaim it's not all that bad for the money... the OP is enjoying a first class view.

Now about those .25in groups.... that's another matter.

 

[UncaGrunny]

Would it be worth noting that the theoretical 3MOA accuracy limit on the 15-22 is exactly that... a theoretical limit?

& I have to ask because I don't know: are the manufacturers' specs of a weapon's accuracy a minimum-deviation spec, an average-performance spec, or a maximum-deviation spec?

In other words, is S&W saying "no better than 3MOA, ever," "on average 3MOA accuracy across many shots" or no "worse than 3MOA, ever" with that spec?

Seems to me it would be a maximum-deviation spec; "Rifle will consistently fire within 3MOA when accurately sighted," but that's just an assumption on my part.

If it is a max-dev spec, then it basically says that no 15-22's will fire worse than that under lab conditions... but it's entirely possible that one or more may fire better.

 

[tomcatt51]

Would it be worth noting that the theoretical 3MOA accuracy limit on the 15-22 is exactly that... a theoretical limit?

Seems the 3 MOA thing is based on peoples' experiences.

I haven't had a chance to shoot 50 or 100 yd groups with mine. They were acquired after this winters' lousy weather started...

My 15-22s (I have 2) will shoot 5 shot 1/4" groups at 50 ft. Now let's get straight what that commonly means:

A five shot 1/4" group will have a GREATEST CENTER TO CENTER distance beteen any two of the five rds of 1/4". In the case of 22LR that would put all the holes COMPLETELY INSIDE a 1/2" diameter circle.

I've also seen people shoot 10 shot groups, pick the 3 that are closest together and use those as their 3 shot group accuracy. Great for bragging rights I guess, but for anything else, just nonsense...

 

[Elmerviking]

I don't think anybody complained your set up, pretty nice indeed. What I and most others don't buy is your 1/4-1/2 inch grouping at 70 yards in an unsupported prone position. That is in fact totally impossible with this rifle. A/ The rifle is not a match rifle
B/ the weather must be perfect , no wind...nothing disturbing the shooter
C/ High precision ammo, each bullet calibrated. For example: the ammo that S&W gave new buyers was claimed to shoot 1,5 inch groups at 100 yards supported!
D/ I doubt a world champion can shoot 1/4 inch groups at 70 yards. (I have competed against one Olympic gold medalist, he was good, but not that good)
So...what do you think?

 

[photoracer]

Personally I highly doubt the 1/4"-1/2" at 70 yards. I have yet to see any 15-22 (have not shot Jerry's however) that could go under even 1" at that distance, even with a lot of mods (most of which have no effect on accuracy) and with supersonic ammo to boot.
In the Accurateshooter .22 ammo test a Bleiker benchrest rifle with a barrel tuner averaged .647" at 75 yards with CCI Mini-Mag. No ammo went below .25 inch and only 15 brands and varieties did between .274" and .494" at 75 yards. I bet 2" is closer to the truth. I have a rifle in .22LR that does .5 MOA off a good rest if I do my job. Ammo requires at least CCI Standard Velocity and would do better with match grade ammo. But to do that the only factory part still on the rifle is the bare receiver. Everything else is aftermarket.

 

[roadkill45]

too bad i can't replace everything on a 15-22 with VQ parts like on my over $1K 10-22! Same with a MKIII only less price. but the VQ will not shoot like a Bleiker....ever!

 

[Rob1]

too bad i can't replace everything on a 15-22 with VQ parts like on my over $1K 10-22! Same with a MKIII only less price. but the VQ will not shoot like a Bleiker....ever!

Surely if that was the case would it not cease to be a 15-22? If all these mods and changes are needed it begs the question of why buy the platform to begin with????