From dennehym@cs.tcd.ie Sat Jun 17 20:12:35 2000 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (really [127.0.0.1]) by clubi.ie via in.smtpd with esmtp (ident dennehym using rfc1413) id (Debian Smail3.2.0.102) for ; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 20:06:59 +0100 (IST) Received: from mail.clubi.ie by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.2.1) for dennehym@localhost (single-drop); Sat, 17 Jun 2000 20:06:59 +0100 (IST) Received: [from relay.cs.tcd.ie (relay.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.32.56] by hal.medianet.ie (DIESPAM) with ESMTP id e5G6eX626957 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 07:40:33 +0100] Received: from sparks.cs.tcd.ie (root@pc315.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.35.74]) by relay.cs.tcd.ie (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA05073 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 07:40:32 +0100 (BST) Received: by cs.tcd.ie via sendmail from stdin id (Debian Smail3.2.0.102) for mdennehy@clubi.ie; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 07:40:32 +0100 (IST) Resent-Message-Id: Received: from localhost (really [127.0.0.1]) by cs.tcd.ie via in.smtpd with esmtp (ident dennehym using rfc1413) id (Debian Smail3.2.0.102) for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 12:19:05 +0100 (IST) Received: from mail.cs.tcd.ie by fetchmail-4.6.4 POP3 for (single-drop); Thu, 15 Jun 2000 12:19:05 IST Received: from pop2.indy.net (pop2.indy.net [199.3.65.112]) by relay.cs.tcd.ie (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA20617 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 12:17:59 +0100 (BST) Received: from raym-pc-1.indy.net (ip209-183-88-81.ts.indy.net [209.183.88.81]) by pop2.indy.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id FAA05537; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 05:41:58 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.1.20000615054350.00c1b280@pop.indy.net> X-Sender: topshot@pop.indy.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 05:49:07 -0500 To: topshot@indy.net From: Michael Ray Subject: UIT Mailing List Vol. 4 - #23 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_34264940==_.ALT" X-UIDL: EG>!!]oH"!dAG!!]Oa"! Resent-From: dennehym@cs.tcd.ie Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 07:40:32 +0100 Resent-To: Home Email Address Status: RO Content-Length: 52044 Lines: 1089 --=====================_34264940==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sorry for the previous #23, which was really #22 again. My mail program wouldn't send, and I didn't notice that it lost all my changes when it finally did go. Fortunately for me I copied the whole thing to the clipboard before I restarted so I didn't have to recompile the whole thing so here is the real #23. Please e-mail address changes, unsubscribe requests, or submissions to me. In this issue: Need kneeling help Need position help Re: Federal ammo Re: Federal ammo Re: other cheap ammo Re: other cheap ammo Re: Grades of Eley / Bore Snake / other cheap ammo Re: 4765 buttplate Which air rifle to buy Gunsmithing, Inc tuner Re: Quiet Zone timing ******************************************************************** Your humble Editor again I could use some help with my kneeling position to get rid of the pulse (?) wobble of about 20-25mm. I can't seem to adjust my sling on my arm to get rid of it. You can see my position at http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/1190/kneeling.htm While I hardly shoot at all, I did have limited success with a different position last Nov, but the position was terrible in regards to balance and head position. How ironic, but it was nearly as stable as prone at times. Unfortunately, I couldn't duplicate it when I started shooting again in April so I decided to use a more conventional position. ******************************************************************** Dear Michael, great concepts, as always. I am experiencing problems in prone position. Altough I "see"the shots making a 10.9 when I pull the trigger, I got surprised by having shot a 9 or worse, 8!! I cannot explain this, if these shots are made standing, they hit the 10 ring undoubtedly. I have verified my position, relaxation of shoulders and arms and still there are some shots I cannot explain. Perhaps the sighting time has something to do? Can you help me? About trigger control in standing (air and 3p) what do you think is the best time to let the shot go? sometimes, when you wait for a non moving period, it seems too late for releasing the trigger. Guido Lastra BOgota, COlombia [Editor - My problem with prone is my eyes don't seem to always find the center even with a long bloop tube. I just got a SCATT to play with and I can see that I aim at slightly different points on some shots. I also have some pulse beat so if I shoot on the peak of the beat, it may throw a shot out. I also don't always have the same pressure on grip, cheek, etc. No wonder I'm not a good prone shooter! Prone is a highly technical discipline I think and I just don't shoot enough to get all the finer points down. Another thing to watch is wind. As for trigger control, my opinion is in agreement with what you think. By the time it has settled it is often too late. Your finger has to activate the trigger AS it settles.] ******************************************************************** > I haven't done extensive wind testing, but my group of shooters do lots > of NRA 1600 prone matches, and the generally accepted wisdom (many of > them do ammunition lot testing before buying by the 5000 round case lot) > is that the subsonic versions of Federal and other brands yield less > wind dispersion at 100 yards. > To be fair, no one in our group has done bench rest testing under > controlled conditions, with statistical analysis, and published > results. Therefore, our belief that subsonic is better in the wind may > be considered as just popular opinion. The drag at Mach 1 is much more than the drag at either subsonic or supersonic velocities; rimfire ammo with supersonic muzzle velocity become subsonic at a target 100yds away which make it more susceptible to winds than ammo that have subsonic muzzle velocity. ******************************************************************** I have done many hours of testing over the past two years with Federal 900B and Federal 1000B ammunition. All of the testing was done with a machine rest I built that was verified for accuracy with a 36x scope mounted on the rifle. Most of it was in troubleshooting problems that turned out to be unrelated to the ammunition. In the process though, I was looking at the ammunition. In regards to the lead build up in the bore. Take two small pliers and pull a bullet out of the shell. The crimp scraps lead flakes off the lead bullet similar to the ones you find on your patch when you clean the rifle. My reason for disassembling the cartridge was to determine where the variation in the weight of the cartridges were coming from. I had a lot of Federal 900B and Federal 1000B that I observed frequent (1 in 5) shots outside of a tight group. I weighed and sorted the cartridges into 5 groups from light to heavy. I then fired five shots groups with each weight group and then five shots groups with each shot from a different weight group. I found no significant difference in group size by weight. As for where the weight variation was coming from, I disassembled the heaviest and the lightest cartridge I found. All components in the heavy cartridge had more mass than the components of the light cartridge. I concluded cartridge weight could not be used to find bad cartridges in Federal 900B and Federal 1000B. The variations in weight were small (~0.5%). I used a precision 0.1 mg Mettler scientific balance for weighing the cartridges. Zero point did not change from weight group to weight group as indicated by shooting a tight group with each shot in the group being from a different weight class. Federal 1000B Lot 1978B 5 shot groups 3.3625-3.3650 grams 0.210 3.3651-3.3675 g 0.320 3.3676-3.3700 g 0.520 3.3751-3.3775 g 0.280 3.3776-3.3799 g 0.260 1 each of above 0.315 Federal 900B Lot 2030 10 shot groups Random 0.400 >3.3675 grams 0.515 1 wild 651-675 0.460 626-650 0.400 600-625 0.400 <600 0.515 2 wild 2 each of above 0.545 2 wild From my experience with statistics, scientific analysis, and what I normally see from my machine, there is no significant difference between any of the weight groups. I have yet to discover where the fliers were coming from. I can say that there have been some lots of Federal that I almost never saw fliers from, while in the same test another lot gave many. I have made one improvement to the machine rest that seemed to help, but it still hasn't completely explained or eliminated the fliers. The greater the mass, the slower the acceleration with the same force. The carriage on my machine rest was heavy (>30 lbs.). I cut out extra material and significantly lightened it to allow increased acceleration of the carriage while the bullet was in the barrel. I did this because when I tried to test in December when it was cold and the bearings were stiff, I couldn't get a decent group for anything. I realized how significant a slight resistence was. The last test I ran, after cutting the weight down of the carriage, I got the smallest groups I have seen from this machine rest. In both of my rifles it takes only 3 shots with Federal after cleaning for the groups to tighten up. I have observed this every time I have tested and I have conducted many tests (>25). My cleaning process is to run two patches with Hoppes 9 through the bore, two passes back and forth with a bronze bore brush with Hoppes 9, and then three patches with Hoppes 9. The last patch usually comes out clean. I run a dry patch through the bore to clean out any excess solvent. I follow the dry patch with a patch having a few drops of JB-80 oil on it and then a final dry patch. I used to not run the dry patch through after the solvent and oil, but I noticed the groups coming tightening up faster after doing so. With other types of ammunition it is quit different. I just tested a Anschutz 1912 with Eley Tenex. The first 15 shots after cleaning at 50m covered over a inch. Shots 15-20 formed about a 0.3" group. I had observed at least 10 shots with Eley were needed after cleaning my two rifles. With RWS R50, I observed at least 20 shots were needed after cleaning to get a decent group. For this reason I avoid Eley and R50. Tenex and R50 is too expensive to waste that many shots every time I clean my rifle. If I have to switch to this type of ammunition, I will have to experiment with cleaning less frequently. I have heard some discussion that it depends on the rifle. One may say it depends on the rifle, but my two rifle barrels are very different, yet I continue to get similar results from both with Federal "B" ammunition. The one rifle has a Anschutz 1907 barrel (1:16" twist) set back and chambered using a Clymer "Match" reamer. The other rifle has a Shilen Match Select barrel (1:16.5" twist) also with the Clymer chamber. European barrels are choked. If you doubt me, just pull a bullet from a cartridge, lube it up, and push it down a clean barrel. Each European manufacturer has it's own style of choke. American made barrels are straight tubes. No choke. I discovered my "no choke" Shilen barrel with Federal 900A sprayed shots all over the place. The "choked" 1907 barrel does OK. Of the different brands of ammunition I have tested, the Federal seems to be the most consistent from lot to lot and rifle to rifle. I watch out for not so good 900B. It is a second to the 1000B, so occasionally I find a lot of it that is unacceptable. Other ammunition I have tested seem to vary more in my rifles from lot to lot and it takes much more testing to find a good lot number. When I find a good lot of Federal 900B, I get five shot group sizes at 50 m consistently under 0.25" with my machine rest. Nick Priddy GVSU Rifle Coach ****************************************************************** In regard to Mark Shuman and his question on PMC Match ammo, and other cheaper ammo. I know people how have shot in the 280's (1/4 match at 50 ft shot with a 2313) with the RWS target and they swear its the best "Cheap" ammo on the Market. I also know of people who have tested the PMC Match ammo and say its complete junk (at 50 yd and with a 2011 prone gun). I currently have a box a the RWS GECO and I'm still waiting to test it but call Champion Shooter Supply and ask them about it, when I ordered they said it was OK at 50yd but your wasting the ammo at 100yd. As for the cheap Lapua I have no idea. One last thing It really depends on where you shoot (i.e. going from 50ft to 50yd to 100yd), so test all the different types of ammo you can get your hands on. Best of luck Ross Miller ******************************************************************** Here's my two cents worth regarding the ammo issue. I have used T-22, CCI blue label and had great luck with it. I have used these two and had results every bit as good as the more expensive ammo. But, I have also had terrible performance/results, so you have to test, test, test. I find that the Eley Practice 100, Club and other lower grade ammo's work great in my late 50's Model 54 Anschutz. In fact, the one time I tried Red Box, it did not perform nearly as well as the Black box or other lower cost Eley's. Again, it all comes down to what works best in your rifle for what kind of match you are competing in. I would never use the higher cost ammo for indoors at 50-feet on the A-17 and probably not on the A-36 or the new USA Shooting Int'l target card. It is just not worth the cost for the one or two points you may save during a winter league season. I always save my better ammo for use outdoors at 50 yards, 50 meters or 100 yards. I have used the Russian less expensive ammo for some time (I am just about out of it right now) and on the A-17 target, it worked just as well as the more expensive stuff, so why spend the extra money? Hope this adds something to the discussion. Don Williams, Oregon. ******************************************************************** I have heard that many Eley varieties are just selected lots of the same manufacture. Which means that except for the highest price, the quality may vary from one lot to another. If they need to sell more of the lower price ammo, but it is all working great that particular day, you might get Tenex an a lower price. Other days, reject Tenex by some other name might actually be sub-standard or it might be manufactured in a different way. I don't know which Eley varieties are made identically before selection, nor if this is even consistent one day to the next. I tried (yellow) Target Pistol in my bullseye pistol and got poor accuracy, but (orange) Club Xtra worked great for only slightly more, in the particular lots that I received. I immediately ordered more of the same lot of Club Xtra. > with the use of the Bore Snake type bore cleaners ... > One pull through the bore is like using > 25-100 separate patches. I'm careful to pull it straight out from the > muzzle, so not to erode the crown. The one I have is not nearly that good. Pulling the embedded brush through once is exactly the same as running any brass brush through once. The snake itself, regardless the large advertised surface area, tends to stretch out when pulled and be thinner than the barrel, which means it does not make enough barrel contact to clean effectively like a tight fitting patch. > I do have a question on ammo. Has anyone out there on your list tried > RWS Target, the cheaper Lapua or RWS GECO. I tried RWS Target and GECO. I really can't tell any difference between them in any way, they are both sort of mediocre in accuracy. The shells seem much softer than other brands, and absolutely will not come anywhere close to cycling properly in my semi-auto bullseye pistol. However they function just great in my single-shot free pistol and in every single-shot rifle I have tried, including one rifle that cannot properly extract Federal 711. - Benjamin McLeod ******************************************************************** Re: 4765 buttplate No you're not the only one who thinks that. I too tried this butt plate once on a colleagues Anschutz and thought it was a step back. It gave less of a contact 'sensation'. In fact I am on the look out for an older version which came with the Model 54. I found they made very good contact. Have fun shooting. Usman ******************************************************************** I am in a little dilemma on the topic of picking an Air-Rifle that suit's me. Here is my question, what air-Rifle do I choose (sounds simple), there are so many an I am more of a smallbore person so I don't know what's the good, bad and the ugly of the Air world. I currently own/holding a P70 junior which is way too small for me, who is 6'1". I had thought about getting a new stock for it but our club had purchased these from the CMP with the 4 year policy, the club must hold these Air-Rifles for 4 years. I can make modifications to it, but replacing the stock infringes on the 4 year rule. I was thinking about the P70 which is a very nice Rifle but the air cylinder only holds about 80-100 shots as opposed to the anschuetz 2002s cylinder which holds 180 shots. Many Thanks, Ross Miller [Editor - IMHO, accuracy-wise it makes no difference so it comes down to which ever one fits you best and has a trigger you like. I'm surprised the P70 only goes for 100 shots. Perhaps the junior model you're using comes with a smaller cylinder also? I thought all the brands were using 200bar cylinders.] ******************************************************************** Your readers might be interested in my initial experience with the blooptube and tuner now available from Gunsmithing, Inc.(GI) The tuner fits over a blooptube with an o.d. of 1.000 so unless you are a machinist you cannot use the Medisha clamp and tube. The weight of the GI clamp, 16" tube and tuner is about 700 grams. Since I was not ready to add that much weight to the end of my Anschutz 1911 I had the barrel cut to 19.625" - a reduction of about 650 grams. I can't feel any difference now with the tube and tuner from the standard length barrel and I have a sight radius that is about 8" longer than standard. GI also makes an 8" tube that would keep the standard sight radius. The tuner is epoxied on to the bloop tube and it's ready to go. Our club outside St. Louis is very heavy into benchrest shooting and has regular .22 rf benchrest matches at 50yds. It also hosts the National .22 benchrest finals. ALL these shooters use tuners and most of them are similar in design to GI's. The common experience of these shooters is that within 1 or 2 revolutions (depending on the weight of the tuner) you will find a sweet spot in which your ammuntion (high quality ammo) will consistently group in the neighboorhood of .25." In their experience it will not make cheap ammo into great stuff but it will permit a barrel to get the most out of both good or bad ammunition. My own experience is with a lot of Eley BR-50 that I thought shot best in my rifle when I tested ammo several years ago. I am by no means a competent benchrest shooter but I borrowed a test target from a benchrest shooter ( a piece of 8 1/2 x 11" paper with 7 or 8 rows of 1/4" dots about an inch apart) and started testing. The tuner has a scale divided into 25 segments and each movement of the tuner from one division to the next moves the tuner weight .001." I started with the weight about in the middle of its range and moved the weight backwards from 24 to 22, then 22 to 20 etc. firing 3 shot groups each time. The groups were very ordinary to bad until I reached 8 and then when I fired a group at 6, I had a nice cloverleaf group that was about .25" center to center. I fired another 4 or 5 groups with that same setting and got the same kind rounded group about the same size. At that point I quit. I have not had a chance to shoot the rifle prone but I expect good things. The only problem I see is that the tube and weight must be left on the rifle unless you can be certain to replace it exactly. However, the benchresters tell me that these sweet spots have a range of four or five thousandths on these tuners so it may not prove to be that difficult to remove and replace them. Time will tell. Mike Barron ******************************************************************** [Editor - I snipped some stuff out of this post for brevity, but hopefully kept the meaning intact.] COMMNENT: This is interesting, and does not tally with my personal experience in high-level competition. In the beginning, having read about autogenics and the rest, my desire was to be in a controlled state during competition, with a nice slow heartrate. (Being quite fit, my resting heart rate was 45 or so). When it came to the Commonwealth Games, and to finals at the Commonwealth Championships, my experience was that my heart rate went up to nearly 120. This was rather worrying :-( Having dropped one place in the Final of the 3x40 in the British UIT Championships, and as Malcolm Cooper was on the range, I asked him how he (as a double Olympic Gold medal winner in the event, in 1984 and 1988) had coped with Finals. REPLY: While accomplishing the reduced heart beat of 45, this shooter is unable to maintain the rate because of his emotional condition therefore the heart rate increases to 120 beats per second. This is very typical for physical shooting athletes. As for the double medal Olympic winner, we find the winning of any medal in competition is a relational thing and can only have value when consideration is given to the other performance level capabilities of the shooting athletes in competition. Why did this athlete drop one place in the British Championships...? Because of the emotion of fear and doubt. His NDME has raised his heart beat because of this fact. This is a typical physical shooting technique and is the main cause of the physical shooter inability to repeat a fine performance. The emotional insecurities of fear and doubt are the main problems. However, one other element comes into play here and that is the simple fact that any shooting athlete has only one competitor and that is themselves. Every time a shooting athlete approaches the firing line and prepares for the competition, they have only themselves as competitors as not one other shooting athlete on that line is in competition with any other shooting athlete. The only way any athlete will win the Gold is by out performing all others in that competition and that athlete will by out performing his or her personal technical performance levels will win the Gold. So the Athlete will win by out performing his or her level of performance plus out performing the performance levels of each competitor on the competition firing line. This is easy to accomplish as the shooting athlete must use the One-Shot-Match that always results in a PBE on every shot. If the shot will not result in a PBE then break the circuit and restart the one-shot-match again. The shooting athlete will pull the trigger when the sight alignment is a PBE and the QZ~ has arrived according to the timing and mental checklist sequences contained in Chapter 7 of the book. COMMENT: His reply was that rather than trying to avoid adrenaline, and its effect on the body (increased sensitivity to balance and sight, and speedier reactions) he had welcomed it as an aid to his shooting; and that while the rifle might appear to be jumping around, it might well be that it was just an increased awareness of my normal movement. His advice was to "go for it", accept that the target would appear to be moving, and to trust ones training and reactions. View the adrenaline as an advantage, not as a disadvantage. [Note - I took his advice in the prone final the next day. It worked well enough REPLY: By Mr. Cooper accepting excessive levels of adrenaline he has started the destructive elements of the physical shooting technique. Any athlete will reduce adrenaline rush by mental control through the use of the mental checklist technique and the procedures of Chapter 3 and 4, Match Pressure in the book. When mental practice is accomplished, the element of adrenaline rushes is not an element of the mental practice session, but is an element which is reduced or eliminated all together. The by product of adrenaline rushes is the increased sensitivity to balance, sight, and increased reactions. All will be found to be the domain of the autonomic or NDME mental system which will not require the increases of adrenaline in any manner. The NDME has taken care of this requirement very well in the past and can continue to monitor and respond with precise amounts of such adrenaline as necessary for the accomplishment of the PBE and Gold. So stop being a physical shooter and become a mental shooting athlete. Beware of those who use their medals as the validation or authentication of any given technical system or procedure. Don't accept such physical items. Go for it, not on your life. Learn to do it right and then win the Gold. If the target is moving you have something wrong with your position or shooting technique and you had better learn to eliminate the problem through mental practice and use mental shooting technique. COMMENT: This tallied with a presentation that Alister Allan (3x40 Bronze in 1984, Silver and Olympic Record 1988) gave to a group of Scottish shooters. On asking whether anyone would consider firing the shot when the target was moving, and receiving a lot of headshakes, he pointed out that if you go into an Olympic Final in 1st place, with an Olympic Record, it didn't matter how "cool" you were, your heart would still be going at 120, and the target would appear to be bouncing around like a mad thing. REPLY: This is not true for an athlete using mental control techniques. Such emotions are repressed and otherwise removed from the shooting technique. The above is only natural to the physical shooting athlete and never to the mental shooting athlete. That is the difference. Because this athlete has won some medals, you are told that this is natural; to experience shakes, heart rate increases, and the target commences bouncing around. This is the first clue that the shooting athlete has not trained correctly and is a physical shooting athlete instead of a mental shooting athlete which can and does control such random occurrences. The mental shooter uses the QZ~ and mental check list and for the 3/4 of a second with the above occurring with the shooting result of the PBE. Chet Skinner, Coach cskinner@dol.net ******************************************************************** End of UIT Mailing List #23 Michael Ray - Systems Engineer Rose-Hulman Inst. of Tech. Rifle Coach UIT Shooting Page - http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/1190/index.htm