Home Forums Hunting & Shooting AR and Tactical Rifles Single Stage AR Trigger Comparison

Here's an article that will leave you smiling.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-07-29-iraq-sniper_x.htm

Have a good day!

What do 7" circles have to do with head shots?

Yeah, LOL, might want to try it rather than believe what you hear...

I've killed and will continue to, deer out to 600 with the 223... its not a big deal. Shot placement is the key. As it is with any cartridge. Heck the 22LR is enough for deer to 100 pretty easy all day long too.

Edited for clarification....

What do 7" targets have to do with head shots?

Some credibilty should come from the fact that the short range to 300 targets have been head/shoulders silhouettes only. and the 500 out have been 3/4 full silhouettes....

Yes, I suspect stationary head/shoulder targets to 300 yards are doable when your on the square range and no one's shooting at you.

You didn't read the article. 400 yard head shots were doable for the Marine.

Your "2-way" range perception brings up a good question. If the enemy is *always* shooting back at you and you never get shots at them when they aren't expecting it, are you a good soldier?

The Marines in WWII also shot Japs in the head as they swam out to sea trying to escape. I think it was the battle of Okinawa, for one.

BTDT have we?

Well this thread is just plumb full of fail.

1-A 7" target is not representative of a headshot. Hitting a 7" target has nothing at all to do with shooting somebody in the head.

I've seen exactly two people shot in the head, that weren't suicides with shotguns. Both lived. One appeared dead, then woke up and gave me such a fright that I nearly shot him myself. He walked to the ambulance, got a stitch and went home with a headache. A shot in a the hard parts of a skull aren't reliable head shots. The second was shot through the lower part of his face, below the eyes, with the bullet passing from the right side of his face to the left. Aside from nearly drowning in his own blood he was fine. In fact, I had to fight him into handcuffs. A shot in the parts of the head that don't contain brain or spinal column aren't reliable head shots.

A real, honest to goodness headshot is a shot that passes through the eye-nasal-ear-temple area and into the brain-spinal column. If you're shooting a 7" circle and calling that a head shot you're kidding yourself.

2-What target are we talking about that the military is using for head shots? Rost mentioned head / shoulders.....


Is this the target we're talking about? Because that head / shoulders target is 26" wide and 19" tall, although it tapers at the top. Even with the taper to the head shot, that's a giant target and definitely not representative of "head shots at 300".


3-As I said, yes...A head shot (a real head shot) at 300 yards is a small target, especially under field conditions, away from a bench or bipod. A real head shot is around 3".

So I don't know what all military guys are shooting 3" targets at 300 yards with 3MOA ammo, but I haven't seen any. And I've seen more than a few guys from the military on the range. In fact I was on the range this afternoon with a jarhead that repeatedly missed a torso sized piece of steel at 200 yards with a 4X ACOG. So apparently he missed "head shot day" in boot camp.

AMU recommends a 300 meter zero.
http://www.armytimes.com/story/mili...on-marksmanship-misconceptions/81544236/


This quote even illustrates that 300 is a significant number.

Blue, with all due respect, I think you are too caught up in the 3-gun blam-blam style shooting. Not that it doesn't have value, the Army teaches it so obviously they think it's important. I understand you are LE too and that is a totally different situation. If you can't smell the target's breath, it's probably going to be called an unjustified shooting.

I'm no soldier, but even I'm smart enough to know that not every engagement is going to be "Hogan's Alley". A good soldier is going to do a lot of stalking, a lot of ambushing. That goes for the enemy too.

When you talk about the improbability of hitting a 3" target (Oh, BTW, the X ring is 3") you also fail to take into account that a soldier usually has friends and they are often shooting at the same target. They may not hit on the first shot, but if each of them dump 4 or 5 rounds on target the probability of a hit is pretty damn good, even in the days of the M1.

Sorry this is so sidetracked, but you blammo types just don't seem to have a clue. You treat high power rifles like they are at best submachine guns.

They are no "head shot" targets in any longer range military qualification that I know of. Smallest target is a 12" circle, and that's the bullseye at 100-300m. Then you have a 24" and 36" circle outside the bull that still score (think I remember all that correctly). That's the Marine Corp. Army has silhouettes that pop up out to 300m (singles and doubles I think), hit is a hit no scoring based on where you hit it. And if I remember right, shorter range targets are half silhouettes (shoulders and head vs full torso).

I was, but awhile ago. But brother still is as well as many friends.

Never remember having any issues qualifying, even expert, with a mil spec trigger let alone a good single stage.

For matches, yes, a two stage is an advantage, but for combat, not for me or anyone I know that's been there, done that.

I don't think this is sidetracked at all. When people post nonsense it's important to talk about it.

Blam blam, bad breath, 7" circles, are all irrelevant.

I'm talking about your assertion that the military teaches to make head shots out to 300 yards and then transition to body shots. That's nonsense in its purest form. If it weren't you'd be willing to talk about it.

The targets are the size they are for a reason. And so are the scoring rings. The D target isn't the only target the military shoots at 300. (I don't know where you came up with the "A" Target, but it looks just like a SR target which has an X ring of 3" and a 10 ring at 7"). The goal of putting them in the X & 10 rings of an SR is obviously training for hitting head-sized objects.

Even your picture shows a transition from head/shoulder shots to body shots at 500.

so I have to ask are you joking? you have to be but lets just say for the sake of the argument your not. what you just said indicates you don't have the first clue about making a 600 yard shot. have you even taken one? I have big game rifles that shoot sub half minute and at 600 yards in the field to rely on perfect shot placement is simply a fantasy at that distance. I am relying on less than perfect shooting rests, I also don't get to take 4 sighter shots before I decide to shoot.

trying to shoot a deer at 600 yards with a 223 is well yeah akin to shooting a deer with a 22lr at 100, both are equally as irresponsible. and further internet BS. let me quess your probably doing it with a 16" barreled ar 15 too.

also if your from where is listed on your profile the type of terrain and hunting conditions in that area aren't conducive to even needing to shoot that far.

so just admit your spouting internet BS

The targets and scoring rings are the size they are so that people who miss will still pass a qual, not because they're realistic.

It helps to know your audience, douche bag.

Well, now you guys have given me yet another reason to feel inadequate! Here I was gimping along with the stock trigger in my AR (a little creepy but altogether not heavy, and smooth), getting well under sub-MOA accuracy off the bench and hitting anything placed in front of me from field positions out as far as I care to shoot. Now I find myself googling these various triggers y'all are talking about, and scheming about an upgrade. Truth be told, I'm not unhappy with my trigger and there might not be any need for me to change it.