Home Forums Hunting & Shooting AR and Tactical Rifles Little Help Here (diagnose this group?)

Take the guy who shined shoes in NYC before enlisting. Give him basic military rifle training and he will swear to his dying day that the M16 bullet rises when it leaves the muzzle. He was taught that, and after growing up without ever touching a firearm he actually hit targets at 450 yards using his training.
He KNOWS what he's talking about.

Never mind that the reactive target was huge, and dropped the same for a marginal hit as it did for a center punch.

I actually went through basic with the guy depicted above. He enlisted for a clerical job, but boy was he proud of that rifle.

But I also went through basic with Robert from Georgia. Grew up shooting and had incredible eyesight. Never any doubt that he could handle a rifle. I assumed that I'd be the best shot in my basic training unit. I was disillusioned.

I can’t find reference to it in the Army manuals but I wasn’t looking to hard. I will ask one of the ft rich range control guys next time I see one. Those former army guys you see must of been cooks or supply.. lol.

Skipping bullets into them was the best lol.. when I went through basic, we had a fella from New York City. He spent two days on the zero range ph ucking drill sergeants were beside themselves. I was zeroing right next to him on day two. 3 Drills on him one was laying down watching him and that’s when the show kicked off. Jesus H Chris one the drill that was laying dow. Yelled this dumb mother [bleep] is closing his eyes Everytime he pulls the trigger. I was like holy ph uck I’m glad that isn’t me. 12 shots I was zeroed and got the hell off the range.

No need to quote me endlessly on that. Still hurts a bit 45 years later...

I shoot with a lot of guys that have had different training. One gunny sarge from Quantico, some/many from the vietnam era in my club. The old guys like that are dying off too fast these days. They bring a lot to the table, but in general, the gunny "sarge", the airborne ranger, and the ex snipers we have at my club are great shots. Even with their aging eyesight etc. But, I agree, not all army guys are like that. I was at the range the other day when a new member showed up with her boyfriend and he was an ex marine. Younger guy in his late 20's maybe 30 at most and shot like chidt. He kind of got pizzed when his girlfriend was razzing him that I was shooting better than he was and I was using irons. I was't there to compete against that damn guy. He was using the typical macho azz 300wm and big ol leupold. Couldn't hit chidt though. I didnt' even know she was giving him a hard time until my airborne ranger buddy started talking to me. He was shooting to the left of me at one bench and the couple were to the left of him. The punk marine kid finally said his "sniper" buddy would give me a run for my money. But we've all heard that talk, until money gets thrown down on the bench...

OP, I went out and bought a rifle with real iron sights, just to see what all the fuss is about. Rifle and my handloads shoot pretty good. Military M193 55gr FMJ chidt, not so much.. Surprisingly, though, my buddies rifle loves the 62gr green tip M885 ammo.. If you are just wanting to buy cheap ammo to run through your rifle, maybe try looking for some of that and see how your rifle likes it..

You seem to label anything that doesn't match your experience and or expectations as "chidt"... Can you explain why you consider ammo that performs better than it's design specs, as mentioned in the AR15.com MOLON test that was linked to above as "chidt"?

And the MOLON test was fired from a Sinclair bench rest with a vari-xIII set on 25X. And here is his description of the test platform rifle. (The test vehicle for this evaluation was a 16” Colt HBAR with chrome lining, a NATO chamber and a 1:9” twist. This is the barrel found on the Colt 6721 carbine. This barrel was free-floated with a 10” LaRue free-float handguard. I specifically choose to evaluate the accuracy this ammunition using an AR-15 with a chrome-lined, NATO chambered barrel, as this is the type of barrel that is most commonly used to fire this type of ammunition. It is sometimes possible to obtain slightly better accuracy from mil-spec/NATO pressure loads by firing them from an AR-15 that has a stainless steel match-grade barrel with a hybrid chamber such as the Noveske NMmod0 chamber or the Wylde chamber for examples; but you're not going to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
The 16” Colt HBAR is one of the most accurate “off the shelf” chrome-lined, NATO chambered AR-15 barrels that I’ve evaluated. Three 10-shot groups fired from this barrel from a distance of 100 yards using match-grade hand-loads topped with Sierra 52 grain MatchKings had extreme spreads of:
0.85”
1.14”
0.88”)

And with this combination of gear he held groups with the ammo I'm now shooting (IMI M193) of just under 3".

Ok... I too have seen some of what the military turns out as "riflemen"
But I'm also gonna say that anyone who hasn't packed up their rifle, their lunch, drinking water, and their raingear and, after breakfast, walked with 200 other guys 4 miles to the range to qualify simply has no proper perspective to comment.
Never mind that all 200 guys are expected to zero their rifle and qualify that day, from 8 firing points, under the guidance of 12 drill sergeants, and walk back to their unit area in time for supper.
Never mind that this unit is using rifles that have had thousands upon thousands of rounds, and hundreds of jointed steel cleaning rods through them on a constant basis since they were issued to the unit

Now, honestly...
I get your point. The rifle with good components, superior optics, and proper tweaking, combined with handloaded ammo can be made to perform to a higher accuracy standard.
Be still, my heart...

But I do feel just a bit sorry for anyone who fails to appreciate a 4" group with service grade ammo, from a service grade (And maybe well below service grade) rifle.

And yeah... I was at the range again yesterday. I'll admit that just under 4" was my best group. But my worst was a bit over 5".

And that was with the cheap mag-pul sight.
Things went south a bit when I installed the carry handle. Consistency went completely out the window when I put it on the rifle. Gonna have to look at it closely.

I am happy to report that the mag-pul sight returned to zero minus one windage click when re-installed. Thinking now that this sight is better than I initially judged it to be.

3" groups with a rifle like that is for damn sure nothing to write home about. Most of us here know the m193 ammo is garbage. Or for better use of terms, "fu cking chidt"... If you are going to continue to use it and shoot your 6" groups, you'll likely not get any useful help from anyone here. Like I said earlier, I shot some the other day and was able to shoot 3" groups with it from a bone stock Colt sporter. Not a fancy HBAR with freefloat handguard and who knows what match grade trigger. Even molon had this to say about it: "It is sometimes possible to obtain slightly better accuracy from mil-spec/NATO pressure loads by firing them from an AR-15 that has a stainless steel match-grade barrel with a hybrid chamber such as the Noveske NMmod0 chamber or the Wylde chamber for examples; but you're not going to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear." The "sow's ear" he is referring to is the crap military ammo.. How many of us have to tell you this before you start believing us?

In Basic, in my company of 200, I was the only one who could hold a 6" group at 300 yards.

You were fortunate to be allowed that opportunity. When I went through basic we zeroed at 25 and immediately went on to the reactionary target qualification. No one shot any kind of group at all past 25.

The next time I fired at paper with an M16 was at my permanent party station, Ft Bragg. Even there I considered myself fortunate to have a unit CO that had any passion for marksmanship, and the willingness to use unit budget funds to pursue it.
Training is expensive.

And I hit the range for a couple of hours this morning. Managed 1 group of 10 just under 3.5", albeit with one inexplicable high flier that put me at just over 5". Found some large red oval targets with a prominent white center, and these may just be the easiest targets to acquire a sight picture that I've used yet. At 100 yards anyway.

I did shoot one 200 yard target with them but the white center was invisible. Still I kept everything in the center of the target with a group that strung vertically 8.5" All in all my best 200 yard target with this carbine.

Did manage a couple of 10 round clean runs on the unpainted 8" steel at 100 from the standing supported.

Went 4 for 10 on the 200 yard steel, also standing. A good morning, in my eyes...

Actually a 3" group with that ammo should probably be considered excellent. It's design spec calls for all impacts to be within a 2" radius of POA.

And I'm quite happy with the performance from it that I'm getting. Several responded with quite apt and helpful advice to my request for group diagnosis. My technique has improved accordingly. And my groups have, and continue to improve.
Am I gonna shoot MOA or even sub 2" with it? If I do, I'll crow a little, but neither MOA or accuracy bragging rights are my goal.

Like I said, Several have responded with helpful advice. Even some of your advice has been very helpful.
My thanks to all.

Am I ever gonna shoot like I did when I was 23?
Reason says not. And the details of that are boring, but now that I've got this carbine, I'm enjoying using it

That is incorrect.

With M193, M855, M855A1 it is possible for them to pass spec and be issued, and yet not be able to group all rounds on an 8 MOA target. Those “fliers” you’re seeing probably aren’t. That’s what most lots of mil ammo does.


Most lots of M193, M855, and will generally be between 3.5-5.5 MOA for multiple ten round groups, when there are no group reduction techniques applied. M855A1 will generally be between 4.5-6.5 MOA from most AR’s.

An E-Type is approximately 20x40 the inches. It is huge. It’s also interesting when people bring up Marines and shooting at 500 yards.... their target is 6’x6’. Yes- 6 feet by 6 feet.

The military is garbage at shooting, and the only reason they don’t know it is because they shoot massive targets, with ridiculous amounts of time to do so, and they don’t compete in the civilian world in action matches. And no, the special people aren’t any better. They only way someone will be truly good at shooting is if they compete- military or not.

Here's some clarification on the USMC rifle target dimensions.

If a Marine is only hitting paper, he will fail to qualify.

Formid...
I consider myself to be one of the "special" ones. In a short bus, helmet, window licker sort of way.

I recognize what you are saying as a truth of sorts. But I think the larger truth is that the military is well served by clerical types who can use their primary weapon to engage a target and perform basic fire and maneuver exercises after 3 days of rifle and 3 days of ground combat training.

I was in a unit that took every opportunity to enhance marksmanship in those who showed any proclivity for it. At least with 2 of the 3 COs I saw come and go. Open competition would have been way better, but difficult to set up and impossible to pay for by the unit.
Those who were were truly good got there on their own.

No doubt. And I stated it with no smack talk/arrogance- just reality. They get points for hitting a 6 foot by 6 foot piece of paper at 500 yards. All the nonsense about “Marines qualify to 500 with irons” is just that. Even the black is huge and doesn’t represent any viable real life target. Non of the other branches are better either.
The new ARQ while still not what it should be is much better. And a bunch of Marines that immediately qualifed “Expert” on the old/current qual, turned around and failed to qualify at all on the new one. And the new one would be smoked by any mid level 3 gunner.


Again, with no degeneration intended- the military, any part of it, is not where to look for any source of knowledge or capability in shooting. From the highest levels down, any one that became good did so outside the organization.








Maybe. But no one would say someone with 3 days of high school anatomy class is a “good” doctor. Saying anything about shooting performance or knowledge in relation to the military is just a red herring. They’re not good at it and it is a very poor barometer.


As for your shooting.


With M193 ammo and not using a sandbag, so mag monopodded prone, 10 round groups that consistently stay inside of the black on a B8 bullseye and score somewhere in the low to mid 90’s is decent.

It's fair to say the bullseyes are large on the targets I posted above. But you have to remember those were the standard for iron sights for many years.

That Alpha target is narrower than the front sight post at 300, and the B-Mod is narrower than the front sight post at 500.

Considering that optics are the new standard, those targets may need some updating.

On the other hand, if our ammo is 4-moa accurate, the 12" 'Abel' target is 4-moa at 300 yards, and the 20" wide B-Mod is 4-moa wide at 500 yards.

So those targets are actually correctly sized for the precision of the ammo.

You arent shooting 3" groups, from what im seeing. Your target at 100 yards is clearly 6" at best. You'd also have to shoot multiple 10 shot groups and get an average, to really evaluate the situation. Im laughing here because you want us to evaluate your groups, but you refuse to use better ammo and want to argue the fact that the majority of us are saying that ammo is garbage. When i take ammo, put it in any of my ar's and im shooting 3"+ groups at 100, its plain and simple chidt ammo. Im talking me and my ammo personally, because i know what my rifles can do on a daily basis. Again, if you arent going to switch to a better ammo, proven optic, stable rest and good shooter, we cant be much help to you. You havent proven to me that you are even a capable shooter, so where to start? If you had an ar that you could prove to us that you know what you are doing, IE: shoot consistent sub moa groups, we would know you arent the problem. How are you with other iron sighted ar's? Ar's, even with iron sights, can be deadly accurate, with the right load and shooter. Listen to guys like rost, formid, montanamarine and others that have far more trigger time in, with the ar platform, than i do and if you do some of the things that were suggested, maybe then you'll get it figured out. And remember, the title of your thread is "diagnose this group". I think thats what most of us here are doing, but you need to get the idea out of your head that the ammo you are using is good chidt, because it isnt.