Don’t call that number. The above is satire. I can’t believe I need to type this but better safe then sorry.

The Meprolight M21 is a tough optic…  but I found multiple ways to cause a malfunction. You may have heard of the washout issue, but there’s oh so much more. Let’s break down my review of the M21:

First the good:

The M21 feature set looks good, and some of the features are good. The optic is battery free which is still very cool. In good lightning conditions its just as bright and eye catching as any electro optic. The reticle has a bonus of remaining crisp and sharp. Unlike standard red dots, the reticle doesn’t bloom or expand. My model has a triangle reticle that glows nuclear hunter orange in the sun and it remains very sharp even when it gets very bright. In fact I would go so far as to say its my favorite red dot style optic from a reticle perspective.

The optic has a drop off at the base of the projection tunnel that allows water to wash out from the bottom of the optic. Contrast this to some red dots which lack a drain… which can let water pool on the emitter. Rain won’t occluded the m21s emitter. Smart.

After that some other good points are that it’s built like a tank. It’s cast body is thick and appears overbuilt. The mount is fair and low profile with built in steel inserts to ensure the aluminum doesn’t wear away at the pivot points. It feels robust. The click adjustments are obvious and positive. This optic will last a long time. Like really, it’s a tank.

Now the Bad:

Let’s get the low hanging fruit out of the way: the washout is the biggest issue that most shooters recognize out of the gate. Shooting from dark to light, the reticle can be difficult to find quickly. This is not the right optic to defend the castle with. Weapon lights also make the optic disappear instantly.

That’s not all though. The designers of the M21 had a good idea in that the optic itself has no internal adjustments. The reticle and projection lense of the m21 is fixed in place and all adjustments are done via the mount which physically moves the whole optic up, down, left,  and right.

This should make it very tough right? When you have an external mount you can build things bigger and tougher than the small components of an internally adjusted optic. Right? RIGHT?

Irons out, optic not functional.

I threw it in the mud. The mud caused problems. It caused multiple problems. It occluded the emitter. Immediately out of the mud the dot was gone. The recessed window facing the shooter had mud on it. There is no good way to wipe this off because of how deep it is. The front of the optic could be easily wiped off but this was not going to get the optic back up and running. If you have fat fingers, you will be unable to poke in there and wipe it.

The only solution was to wash the optic with fresh water. I had to remove the optic and dunk it in fresher water to remove the debris and get back online. You just can’t wipe off the emitter or the front lens easily as both are deep in their locations on the optic.

When I returned to shooting groups I noticed my group was drifting left to right. The gun in prior to the mud did not exhibit this behavior. I suspect that the mud silt was in the windage mechanism. The optic has two springs that act on the windage and elevation to remove any play in the adjustments. They simply act as a mechanism to ensure, in this case, that the play in windage and elevation is removed by continuous spring tension.

Walking perfectly left to right after the mud test.

I suspect enough crud migrated into the adjustment mechanism and opposed the spring return. Each shot jerked the optic enough that the spring slop and grit eventually forced the mechanism back to its resting position.

When the optic is clean and the mount oiled, you can easily apply pressure to the optic and move the windage a few minutes with a finger. Like not “oh maybe that’s a minute or so”… No. You can shift it noticeably with finger pressure. Let it go and it returns to zero when clean and oiled. I can see how crud could affect this quite easily.

Let’s contrast this with a Holosun or Aimpoint micro style optic. Mud and sand can’t get in. Pushing on the external surface of the optic will not affect zero. The glass, if occluded can be easily wiped front and back. The emitter cannot get occluded by debris.

Mechanically there is simply less to go wrong from a dirt and mud standpoint. Also at this point the competition is lighter, smaller, and often times cheaper.

It’s large (and heavy) for what it does. Sure nothing I did would have “killed” the optic, but it was simply too easy to cause a “malfunction.”

The m21 will set you back $450. The weight is 13Oz, it washes out, it is not useful with weapon light, and function can be inhibited by debris… its not looking like a good buy. If you want to buy a polarizing filter, there goes another $50 and now you have a Vietnam era OEG. I would rather drop another $100 on a RMR. Which I just did.

Wrapping up:

So who is this optic for? I can see several roles: turkey hunters would have a reliable shotgun optic with almost nothing to go wrong. However if they are inside a dark blind then maybe not.

3 gun: outdoors and under no shade this optics reticle is fast and precise. No batteries to forget or electronics to fail so that excuse won’t spoil your trip. If your paranoid about electronics, this may be your optic.

Ranch rifle: bingo as above. If hauling this scope around the ranch then you will always have a reticle and reliability just ensure you do some pmr once in a while to remove crud from mount. Also spotlighting deer won’t work so the optic will keep you honest at night.

Shooters who can’t use a red dot due to eye issues: I have heard rumors that these style of optics have far cleaner reticle than those of a typical red dot. Less bloom and no weird grape effect. Try before you buy but the sharp reticle is this optics best feature. It’s very sharp and little to no bloom. I love it.

That said I need to find a home for this optic. If you have a fixed front sight and a pop up rear thus might work for defensive use with co witness and a light… but this is 2022. Even China is making bomb proof red dots with 50k battery life.

If the m21s predecessor has the same failings then I would say pass on that one too.

Lothaen out!

The post The Meprolight M21: Missing the Mark first appeared on The New Rifleman.

Tools for Zeroing the AK47

To get your AK47 shooting as well as it can, we recommend getting two important tools that will serve you well. First, there are special targets available that come with instructions for zeroing the AKM series of rifles in accordance with their iron sight markings and Soviet doctrine.

From there, to adjust the front sight you’ll need an AK front sight tool. These are a little pricey for AR folks, who are used to using either cheap sheet metal tools or, more likely, the tip of a bullet. Check out this website if you are looking for some good promos. But, assuming you don’t lose it, you’ll only ever need one AK front sight tool, so get one and keep it somewhere safe.

Of course, you’ll also need ammunition for sighting the rifle in. Here, cheap, steel-cased surplus ammunition is more than fit for the task and is often more consistent than commercially made ammunition today.

Before you get into other parts of training, it’s worth dedicating an entire range session to getting to know your rifle for the sake of zeroing the rifle and also memorizing the sight picture and trigger. These basic parts of learning how to shoot a particular weapon system well are basic, but they are also fundamental to getting the most out of the weapon platform. In well-trained hands, an AK is an exceptional rifle, and you’ll soon learn why it’s been so popular for over half a century at this point.

Manual Of Arms

Rifles are all somewhat similar. Make sure it’s loaded, point the dangerous end at the target, and squeeze the trigger slowly for best results. That’s why a lot of AR shooters think they can pick up an AK and think they’ll do well. Here, it’s vital to take a second and walk through the important differences so you don’t stumble so much with your AK.

To load an AK, inserting the magazine is a little different than in an AR. For an AK, you need to seat the front of the magazine first, then rock it back into place. When the magazine is seated, pull on it to make sure you got the rear part in well. Then, the charging handle is on the right rather than on the back: most right-handed shooters prefer to use their left hand, brought over the rifle, to cycle the bolt and cock the weapon?

If the bolt won’t go back, that’s because your safety, which is a piece of sheet metal that physically prevents the bolt from traveling, is in the up position: most people will find that they can bring the safety, which is on the right side of the receiver, down with their right-hand index finger with a little practice and some maneuvering.

Once you’ve expended your ammunition, things are way different from an AR. For one, the bolt will go forward after the last shot and you’ll know you’re empty when you get a click. Then, to get the magazine out, there’s a paddle by the trigger guard rather than a button on the receiver.

We recommend taking some time, without live ammunition, practicing loading, cocking, and reloading the AK until it’s a smooth operation for you.

Accuracy Expectations

Keep in mind that the AK47 was designed as a frontline infantry rifle meant to replace submachine guns and carbines in Soviet Military service. Hitting a target at 1000 yards was entirely possible in 1914: accuracy does not win modern wars by itself. The volume of fire, on the other hand, makes a big difference.

That’s why the AK is about a 2-4 MOA gun depending on the particular firearm: you can expect 2-4 inch groups from a bench rest at 100 yards. Assuming your goal is to use an AK as a defensive weapon, it is totally reasonable to expect, with iron sights, to make hits on a human-sized target at 300 yards. More than that, and you’ll need both magnified optics and a fair bit of luck as you’ll be beyond the effective range of the cartridge. The AK is a combat rifle first and foremost: you can get good accuracy out of it but this is not what we would be willing to call a precision sharpshooting weapon.

Accessories

Assuming your AK is a defensive rifle and not simply a toy, we think it’s incomplete until you put a sling on it. On a simple AK build that might be all that we do.

UltiMak with DIO red dot.

If, on the other hand, you’re considering getting a little more contemporary, then it might be worth looking around for a front handguard that has some rail sections that allow for the installation of a weapon light at the very least. Whether it’s with a side receiver mount or on the handguard, a red dot sight can also be a good option. Lastly, we think that some kind of small hand grip also makes the recoil a bit more manageable for a lot of shooters.

Conclusion

In this piece, we’ve looked at some training tips to get you up and going with an AK47. While it’s a little different from an AR, especially in terms of the manual of arms, a lot of the same general principles apply.

With just a little bit of practice, a few tools, and some ammunition, the AK series of rifles are reliable, reasonably accurate, and perform well for a wide variety of purposes.

The post Training Tips for the AK-47 first appeared on The New Rifleman.

From there, we’ll take the time to compare it to 9mm and try to track down some firearms that shoot this new cartridge. To wrap things up, we’ll give you our take on whether or not this new cartridge is worth pursuing for your concealed carry weapon.

Development:

History

Federal ammunition released the 30 Super Carry in 2021 to respond to an apparent need in the market. For the past century, 9mm Luger has been the primary cartridge for semi-automatic handguns, and for a lot of people, it works fantastically well.

But physics is physics, and with a fixed cartridge length dictating things like grip and magazine size, there’s only so small a 9mm handgun can be.

If you wanted a smaller gun (and cartridge), but to still be able to defend yourself adequately, the next smallest option has been .380 ACP. This time, our science foe is chemistry: with a similar size projectile, the same powder, and less of it to burn, the .380 has always been considered slightly anemic and only borderline useful for self-defense.

The Concept

Taking many of the same ideas that led rifle design from large .308 diameter rounds to smaller 5.56mm rounds in the 1950s, Federal has made something of a reasonable compromise: using a smaller projectile than standard 9mm, a shorter case, and, apparently, hotter powder, they’ve developed a round that has similar penetration to 9mm, with only slightly higher velocity to make up for the loss in mass. The concept is a promising one to be sure.

Source: Federal Premium Ammunition

.30 Super Compared to 9mm 

What Info We Have Now

If Federal’s website is to be believed (which we do, but always take a company’s site and marketing with a big grain of salt), then .30 super is a compelling cartridge. It will use a bullet that’s slightly smaller than standard 9mm in terms of weight, but with clever bullet-design and hot powder, promises to penetrate nearly as well as 9mm along with similar expansion.

Assuming both of those things are true, then it might make a lot of sense to adopt this cartridge in the smaller handgun designs it would allow.

More Independent Testing

As of yet, there has not been a ton of independent, verifiable testing done of the .30 Super, but what little we have been able to find indicates that Federal is not selling us snake oil: the cartridge penetrates very slightly less well than 9mm, but a little bit better than .380.

Again, assuming the manufacturing remains to that standard and handguns chambered for this new cartridge come to the market soon, we think it might well end up a popular defensive round.

In short, .30 Super is compelling, if you can find a gun for it. So, let’s try to track one down.

Firearms in .30 Super 

Since this is such a new cartridge, walking into your local gun store or pawn shop is not likely to yield you good results for finding a handgun in .30 Super. At the moment of this writing, the best that we could come up with is that Smith and Wesson appear to produce and sell several of the more carry-oriented, compact versions of the Shield in the caliber.

16+1 in a compact pistol with extendo plate on your magazine. I’m kind of impressed.

The cheapest one we could find was $521 MSRP. Cost is going to be a factor that we’ll circle back to here in a moment.

The other option, tracking down a rumor, is that Nighthawk makes 1911 copies in .30 Super as well. We found the webpage, and it’s a custom-only job that requires you to call and ask for a quote. If our experience in car dealerships and restaurants is any indication, “ask for price” usually translates to “a lot.”

“it cost more than you make in a month.” – Some Bad Dude

This is a new cartridge, and we get that. But, with that in mind, most people who are buying guns are not enthusiasts willing to spend thousands of dollars for a carry gun. While there are still cheap 9mms on the shelf you can go home with today, a .30 Super carry that’s likely a lot more expensive might be a tough sell.

So, Is .30 Super Carry Worth It? 

To give a short answer to the question, we’re going to do a bit of a dodge and say: not right now, but it likely will be in the future.

When it comes to carry guns, we think in terms of practicality first and foremost. Performance is part of that equation, and in that regard, we like the promise of the .30 Super over the anemic .380.

But being practical also means being able to find the firearms. At this moment, finding a gun, or ammo, in .30 Super might be something of a challenge. Sadly, 9mm and .380 half about a century of a lead over .30 Super on this one, so it will be difficult to compete with either of those in price any time soon. If Federal can work on getting relatively cheap ammo, and compact firearms in .30 Super on the market, we’d be a big fan. For example, is Sig made a P365 in .30 Super, we think it would be an excellent firearm that we’d be happy to carry.

Conclusion

As gun enthusiasts, we think the .30 super is an awesome concept that will probably lead to at least some adoption in medium to compact concealed carry guns, and in that regard, we think it’s a great thing.

At the present, however, it’s hard to find and the guns that fire it are either full size, custom 1911s that we don’t know the price on without calling for a quote, or relatively expensive options from Smith and Wesson. We’re excited to see where this caliber goes, but it will be hard to replace 9mm handguns in people’s collections.

-Benjamin

The post Sidearm Sunday: Is .30 Super Carry Worth it? first appeared on The New Rifleman.

Cartridges like the .45ACP and the .308 Winchester were about as large as it got. It wasn’t until the “stubby” rounds that the large caliber ARs truly came into their own.

Now you can drop a huge lead-delivery device on top of a standard AR lower in the form of a large caliber upper receiver conversion, and get some different tasks done with America’s favorite rifle. 

This article is set to explore the options that come along with this new-found large-diameter obsession that stems from bridging the versatility and usefulness of the modular, component driven AR eco-system into even greater boundaries. 

The Versatility of The AR Platform

It was already America’s favorite gun before the “innovative guys” in the tactical space started trying to innovate based on how much grain weight per shot could be moved by the AR platform. 

Now when the “innovative guys” moniker is used there is some clarification needed: for instance, Bushmaster (purveyors of the .450 Bushmaster) was an early proponent of the AR.

One of the earliest mainstream innovators, even if they did have a few bruises thanks to poor product releases and the newness of the concepts they were championing, over the past few decades. 

Additionally, The Grendel guy, Bill Alexander was mostly a bit-part player in an industry ruled by iconic heavyweights like Colt and military production outfits like DPMS. That is, until he started getting innovative on a backdrop of a mostly stagnant AR field.

The 6.5 Grendel and the .50 Beowulf (covered below in some detail), suddenly were very interesting concepts that Bill Alexander had a huge part in bringing to market. 

Who knew what “Tromix” was before the .458 SOCOM? Few who weren’t industry insiders and procurement-types were familiar with the company until it leapt into greatness following the introduction of the hard hitting SOCOM.

What about when Bill Wilson started pushing the HAM’r Rounds? These have become a trademark calling card of the once-1911-specific builder. Now, everyone sees Wilson combat as a true R&D company and defense producer instead of a custom 1911 and shotgun outfitter. 

These are only a small sampling of the “innovative guys”, but they paint a good picture of what the landscape looked like in the infancy of the larger caliber AR rounds. 

Now, a bit more mature, the “stubbies” have come into their own as realistic options for those who want to drop the maximum amount of lead per shot on target out of something easily carried and infinitely shoulderable.  

What’s New in The World of Large Caliber ARs

If you haven’t been following for a couple of years, you’re in for some surprises. Otherwise, the usual suspects from that past couple of years are now a stable of obvious choices in the AR game. 

Shorter Range Behemoths

The range isn’t a factor really. You carry a .45-70 GOVT., or you carry an AR in the field if you want this type of performance – the choice is yours. For under 150 yards, these massive workhorse cartridges provide hard hitting, brush destroying hunting options; law enforcement barrier breaking potential, or just a heavy-handed range option for the enthusiast. “Heavy-handed” is meant in the most endearing way possible. 

The .458 SOCOM

The game changer for the .458 SOCOM is the 600-grain bullet it can project at 1000 fps and with 1330 ft. lbs. of energy which is unbelievably powerful in close quarters combat and against dangerous game in the field, where you may only get one chance to stop a charging bear or buffalo, etc.

That said, the other grain weights in production for the .458 SOCOM are powerful too and align well with the other big bore competitors on this list.

A very good round for tailoring a defensive weapon, like a trunk gun or a law enforcement duty weapon which can be an equalizer in an active shooter situation where the shooter has had time to embed behind cover.

It’s no slouch for hunting either, and you can make the case in the larger game arena, with some definite options on intermediate game under heavy tree cover or in dense brush land. An area like this, where a load option like the 325-grain bullet can push around 1850 fps and 2500 ft. lbs. of energy at the bore exit can tame the landscape with such numbers.

The .50 Beowulf

Probably seen as the stereotypical “big bore” or “large caliber” cartridge on the AR ecosystem, the .50 Beowulf is as destructive as it seems. It can break barriers, shooting into protected positions, and rendering cover pointless, for the bad guys in a law enforcement situation.

But it also shines as a large game, close-range option that delivers big payloads on targets up to 150 yards or maybe even to 200 yards on game targets as big as 1k-1.5k lbs. with the right conditions. 

Comparative to the standard loads for the .45-70 GOVT. You can get more capacity in the AR for non-hunting applications (7-10 rounds for the .50 Beowulf, typically), with similar performance, but in a much smaller package and with many more defensive-minded load options. 

A standard .45-70 GOVT load for comparative purposes offers approximately 2080 fps velocity and 2860 ft. lbs. energy at the muzzle with a 300 grain JHP projectile.

The Beowulf can produce the following:

• 300 grain JHP – approximately 1850 fps velocity and 2320 ft. lbs. energy at the muzzle
• 400 grain – approximately 1800 fps velocity and 2860 ft. lbs. energy at the muzzle

In full transparency; because of the extra-long case length, the .45-70 GOVT can be uploaded heavily to improve ballistics, but it requires handloading and a lot of extra weight and necessitates lower capacities available to the shooter.

Under the right conditions, the Beowulf can be a do-it-all gun for those that live in rural areas that need self-defense in a big way and want to hunt big game with the same gun. Think of it as the Alaskan version of the AR-15.

You can reasonably expect to stop a bear in its tracks with the cartridge out of the very capable AR platform. 

.350 Legend

More like the traditional intermediate sized lever gun replacement, the .350 legend adds .30-30-like performance to the AR and while it is not a truly “big bore” option, it has more than enough power and velocity to produce excellent ballistics. 

It also broadens the range of the larger options on the AR platform, such that you can move into the smaller game on the “big game” spectrum, like deer and still get through the tough skin of goats, rams, and hogs at decent ranges.

You’re still looking at a sweet spot of no more than 300 yards. But the delivery of lead is substantial and the retained energy on target in a potentially brush-dense scenario is excellent. 

.450 Bushmaster

Faster moving than the competitive options and more suitable as an intermediate range, intermediate sized game cartridge, the .450 Bushmaster gives up some grain weight in exchange for penetration and speed and while it may not be the 1000 lb. game option that the bigger rounds are, it’s certainly capable of dispatching a wider range cleanly down into the 125lbs deer range, and above 850 lbs.

In short distances with particularly good brush potential. Also, many would argue if you can take 850 lb. targets you can take a 1k lb. target. 

Comparatively, the above listed cartridges look something like this when laid next to each other (these are approximations):

.450 Bushmaster

Grain weights (250, 260)

Grain weight (260) example: 2170 fps velocity and 2730 ft. lbs. energy at the muzzle 

.350 Legend (for comparative purposes – not intended to be a competitor)

Grain weights (160, 165, 180)

Grain weight (180) example: 2100 fps velocity and 1760 ft. lbs. energy at the muzzle 

.458 SOCOM

Grain weights (250, 300, 325, 405, 600)

Grain weight (405) example: 1600 fps velocity and 2320 ft. lbs. energy at the muzzle 

.50 Beowulf

Grain weights (300, 325, 335, 400)

Grain weight (400) example: 1800 fps velocity and 2860 ft. lbs. energy at the muzzle 

What Is the Best Application for These Block-Busters?

Obviously home defense and law enforcement uses are a reality. The ability to put hundreds of grains of lead on target in a rifle round with rifle accuracy, instead of using a slug gun, or having to have clear sight of a target means these huge rounds just make sense. You can realistically penetrate barriers with these hard-hitting cartridges.

They see use for that type of activity in law enforcement and “likely” in military operations where they make sense – though they aren’t necessarily up for any open contracts in the military defense budget realm. It’s hard to imagine a hard-hitting, door-breaching special operations crew that hasn’t at least explored the idea.

Intermediate and Longer-Range Shooters

You can also classify some of the other innovative and interesting cartridges to hit the market as “larger caliber” options on the AR platform. Though some of them wouldn’t technically meet the traditional standards of the “large caliber” concept. 

You can also add into the mix the one-off specialty cartridge builds that the lower receiver of the AR is capable of accommodating. But that should be tempered with a bit of reality. There are very few proven platforms that deliver true large caliber high-powered centerfire cartridges natively on the AR.

You can see the occasional specialty build from boutique makers, that may include the .338 Federal or the .300 Win Mag. Both cartridges may not truly be considered big bore options. 

Make no mistake though, these are hard hitting ridiculously powerful options that DO fit onto the AR lower. Whether or not you want to discount them in this overall discussion is up to you. 

Do You Really Have to Use a Larger Caliber?

Bigger than 5.56 is sometimes all it takes to get traction in the AR space. And that is why some of these concepts are entertained at all. That said, had they never been entertained we probably wouldn’t have some great contenders like the .350 Legend: the .300 HAM’r, the 6.8 SPC, or even the 6.5’s and the .300 BLK (all admittedly not true big bore cartridges – but all excellent in their own ways). 

Obviously, these aren’t larger caliber options, they just happen to be larger caliber than the .223/5.56. And for some, that’s enough to make a new category. In this case, a very compelling category.

6.8SPC – Special Purpose, But Not Exactly Tiny Either

The 6.8 is hardly a big bore cartridge, but it’s big enough to be interesting to shooters of all types including hunters, law enforcement, military, and even home defense groups. 

.338 Federal

While it’s too obscure of a concept to be in the discussion yet, the idea of a .338 Federal being a viable option in the field on top of an AR, is too interesting to dismiss. But alas, it hasn’t been proven well enough to be a “thing” yet. 

.300 Win Mag

The concept of a .300 Win Mag AR is an incredible idea, being pursued by a very small handful of makers (and only commercially viable currently, for the single company making one). 

It’s a serious and legitimate option. But it’s not proven yet. Time will tell if the market adopts the long-action AR concept as it sits on the market in its current iteration. 

Obscure But Interesting Options Like The .300 Remington SA Ultra Mag

It’s hard to take these concepts seriously in a discussion like this, not because they aren’t cool conceptually, or even potent options, but because they aren’t mainstream enough to even be considered by a wide range of users.

It’s a novelty still at this point – but you heard it here first – the next reach-project for the AR community is likely to be high powered, larger caliber, fast moving cartridges being married to the convenience and market-defying builds of ARs everywhere. 

The bottom line? It’s too soon to include these cartridges in the discussion.

Where Are You Legitimately Using These Cartridges in an AR?

The best use case for the mainstream shooter is at the range or while on the range in search of close proximity, large game. The rounds are suitable in theory for Bear, Moose, Elk, etc. though, you’d need to consult your state and local regulations to be sure they are suitable by the letter of the law. 

In deep brush, these are perfect for deer and other intermediate game thanks to the tank-like energy delivery and the relatively slower speeds, allowing them to punch through standing brush and dense dead vegetation or thickets of bunched trees with the ultimate target of the game animal in the mix.

Admittedly, these are overkill for many species of deer, but you can dial back the loads to increase your game spectrum.

You can easily expect these rounds to take 1000+ lbs. game targets, including dangerous game targets in North America. So hunting is a real option. 

Shooting through everything makes these cartridges a difficult choice for some in a home defense situation though, because they have multiple hit potential and that doesn’t play well in apartment living or other urban-centric domiciles.

On a ranch these things can be incredible options for an all-around firearm from coyote to hogs, to other predators and disruptive targets. This is also a good option for rural home defense in many cases. 

Conclusion

Ultimately, the ever-broadening spectrum of use cases for the AR-15 and even the AR308 pattern are increasing. It was time for the large caliber options to be in the spotlight, and now the consumer can do more things with the already plenty-proven AR.

Thanks to Benjamin for another awesome article!

The post All About Large Caliber ARs first appeared on The New Rifleman.

What’s in the Box?

When I pulled the ARV pistol out of the box, what struck me first was the machining. It’s been a few years since I opened my last PSA AR15 and all I can say is that they are getting very good at what they do. I poured over the pistol looking for issues and found nothing of note.

Roll pins where it counts.

As you can see from the photos, the finish is excellent and it has clean, radiused edges. The receiver is specifically designed to take Scorpion magazines and the gun’s mag hardware is roll pinned into place. Roll pins are a superior solution to set screws or other styles of captured pins. Roll pins don’t come out unless your punch and hammer tells them to come out.

If I have one gripe about the design its that the 6 o’clock portion of the bolt seems a little thin.

The receiver, bolt, and associated components are all clean and free from machine chatter. The magazine release is stiff, but not too stiff. The bolt release / catch stiff, but not too stiff, and the upper to lower receiver fit is just about perfect. Again, I am impressed with how well PSA has been refining their products.

The rail is a typical clamp style M-LOK rail with two hex bolts pulling the aluminum ears taught against the steel barrel nut. The rail is further secured by an two set screws which rise up from the bottom of the rail and protrude into a groove in the barrel nut. The rail has no anti-rotation tabs but the clamping mechanism as well as the set screws feel tight and the system simple and robust. The rail is very basic, but perfectly functional and aesthetically pleasing.

Basic rail, no major concerns noted.

One thing to note is that the trigger is a coated unit and breaks at a clean 6.5 pounds. I have always had a lingering thought that PSA’s kits come with a pretty OK trigger. I have a bin full of mil-spec triggers and most of the triggers from bygone kits and builds have grit, excessive weight, and generally require work to smooth them out and make the ALMOST OK. The coated trigger that comes with the AR-V is the best mil-spec trigger I have handled out of the box. Its better than the ALG Defense, better than the Spikes Tactical, and better than any standard mil-spec trigger I have ever had. I sold my ALG after it lost a feel test to Spikes coated trigger. Currently the Spikes sits in another gun, but it would get the boot if it wasn’t needed for the PSA trigger.

So that’s surprising. The trigger is good, and a perfect execution of a standard mil-spec trigger. Please comment down below if you have the AR-V. I would like to hear from readers if they have the same experience with the stock PSA triggers or did I get a fluke?

So with that out of the way, lets talk guts. The AR-V has cleanly stamped ejector and is user serviceable. My feed ramp has evidence of test firing as evidenced by the two snail trails of copper left on the ramp. The feed ramp is cleanly radiused and has no sharp edges. The bolt catch is a beefy piece of steel supported by additional aluminum from the receiver. If you have been around the AR15 block, you would remember threads that discus bolt catches breaking in blowback AR’s back in the day. I see that PSA enhanced the support in this area to prevent breakage with a solid design.

So out of the box, the gun has impressed me. It’s really hard to find much at fault here at this price range. Let’s hit the range:

In the Woods:

I took the AR-V out on several range trips consisting on three different days. During the course of fire, I had no malfunctions of any type. The ammo used was all ball of various weights. As I am new to the 9mm PCC platform, I do want to share the recoil impulse: it recoils as much as an AR15. Now this isn’t to say it recoils hard, but for much less muzzle energy your getting the same recoil and same feel as a standard AR15. The recoil is manageable and the gun is pleasant to shoot, but it is something to note.

The pistol handles quickly and gets on target fast due to the low weight forward of the receiver. It’s compact, lightweight, and can bring you from zero to target very quickly.

That said, it’s a 100 yards and in firearm. 9mm drops rather quickly even at 100 yards… your starting to hit very low at down the street distance. While it may be possible to longball some 9mm with something like the Primary Arms 9mm prismatic (with bdc), the feel of this platform leans to close urban or home defense scenarios. With 35 rounds on tap from the magazine, it has plenty in reserve to keep you shooting until the threat is gone. So what two things do you need a self defense platform to be? Accurate and reliable. Let’s talk dirty.

Reliability: Flawless Victory

This same test wrecked the PS90. For reliability, go ARV. For anime re-enactments go PS90.

It was time to give the gun a dip in the soup. The pond mud is akin to adding sandpaper to all moving components of the gun. It’s thick, it’s soupy, and the test wrecked the PS90 and the downed the Daewoo. Tossing the ARV into the muck is something I do with an understanding that not many rifles or pistols will survive the mess unscathed.

Once I pulled the muddy spud out of the water it emptied the full magazine like it didn’t care. The entire gun felt like a friction fest. Every surface that *was* smooth felt like sandpaper after the mud bath. The ARV was nonplussed. It emptied the magazine without a hiccup. That said, the Meprolight M21 failed bigly. The water made me lose the dot until I could clean the emitter. The M21 had to go get a rinse back in the drink before it worked again.

I continued to shoot a few more magazines and the story was the same. No failures of any kind. No cleaning. No rinsing of grime. It kept shooting.

With the mud mess out of the way, it was time to perform an accuracy test. I kind of got this backwards, but I figure if it still hits paper after feeling like crap but running like Usain Bolt then why not? Let’s take a look at the accuracy:

Accuracy:

The above group was shot with 124 grain Federal 9mm at 50 yards. I don’t reload for 9mm and I don’t have much in the way of any match 9mm ammo. That said, the pistol is solid from a self defense standpoint, and I can’t ask it to be sub-moa because its not that kind of tool. The red dot on the target is an inch wide. If your concerned about the horizontal stringing, this is the only group that looked like that. Sighting in had no stringing whatsoever so this was a fluke… or was it? Hint: the Mepro21 has me suspicious. Check for that review soon.

That said, I had no trouble keeping the pistol on steel at 50 yards when I didn’t pull the shot. I will update this accuracy test with a better one here with the next range session, so if you want to see the updated review check this review again in a few weeks.

Wrapping Up:

Need a 9mm AR to round out your collection? The ARV 9mm seems to foot the bill and then some. From the robust construction, smooth lines, and reliable operation in adverse conditions… this pistol will perform admirably at whatever task you give it inside of 100 yards. I evaluated this pistol over three range sessions, and so far it has roughly 300 rounds through it. I will be shooting the pistol regularly as it is a affordable means to practice so expect an update if anything blows up. I was provided this gun to review by a site sponsor so we need to clarify the relationship in this review. I received no financial support for this review, however if you click a PSA banner and buy something the blog will receive revenue. I will post a YouTube video to coincide with the review to see the full video of the PSA mud test after I finish the 2nd accuracy eval.

Lothaen Out!

The post Palmetto State Armory ARV 9mm Review first appeared on The New Rifleman.

You can build your own AR! You could probably also buy a better AR with included liability protection (in the form of headspacing and specification pairing) and a brand name cohesive look for less than the build price.

Sure, price isn’t always everything, but it matters, especially when you can get factory integrated high end rifles with desirable third party accessories or brand collaborations, and it costs less than the parts total for your buildout.

Is it always the truth that factory builds are cheaper or offer more bang for the buck? No. In fact, for large swaths of time in the past 15 years there were periods where builders enjoyed a parts glut on the market and the manufacturers were more expensive for the same thing as what you could build for a couple hours (or less) of assembly time.

Right now, it’s pretty close to even, with a slight advantage on the low end side of the market for the factories over a parts build. 

The brand names with lower volumes, loyal fan bases, or particularly good marketing can and do charge a premium. But most assemblers of parts kits won’t be able to build a rifle as seamless and well finished or matched as these higher end manufacturers, and if they can, they may only save a couple hundred dollars, in exchange for several hours of their time. 

Smart manufacturers and those that have some control over their budgets or some maturity in their supply chain can leverage huge benefits as needed to manipulate the profitability and the risk associated with the cost of revenue in their business models. 

Here’s how big manufacturers do this:

• Economies of scale – they buy parts for 20,000 guns at a time, not 1 or 2
• Pricing controls – they negotiate favorable contracts that minimize shipping costs, improve baseline materials, or offer some select benefit because they are buying in volume or with regularity
• Lower risk than the companies that perform contract work for them – they only have the risk of the latest batch, not the machine payments or the material supply disruptions, etc.
• Integrated marketing and branding teams that smaller manufacturers must farm out to afford on a recurring basis, or benefits from long standing branding and name recognition, which leads to padded/insulated sales cycles
• Huge Capital Expenditures that have long since been paid off and now can be used across multiple lines or as part of strategic collaborations to lower total costs of goods sold
• Low cost of capital – your rifle cost you 16.9% on the credit card – their credit lines cost them 2.45% APR and get bundled favorably into the next credit obligation
• MAP and MSRP and other cost controls that help protect distributors and dealers don’t negatively affect the manufacturer’s bottom line, and usually improve them
• They get free marketing from affiliates, collaborators, and other partners because everyone wants to be associated with a big name for exposure, when the end user consumer is likely only to remember the big brand manufacturer the next time they purchase

All these things contribute to the benefit of the brands you might be considering buying a whole rifle from. And let’s be honest, a lot of people think they can easily put together an AR lower receiver and upper receiver because it’s modular and their cousin did it once, but to make a premium product out of a bunch of parts still takes more than a heartbeat and a dead blow hammer.

How Can a Factory Beat Me If My Labor Is Free?

There is not a point in arguing semantics. If you say your time is free because you would be tinkering on a gun anyway, then it’s free. No argument here. The truth is that, as mentioned above in line items, the factory gets cost savings from a lot of different avenues.

They can almost always beat you on price, regarding labor, parts, machinery time, whatever it may be, even if it’s only based on the fact that they use economies of scale. 

Everything a manufacturer does is based on massive economies of scale. Here’s just a single example: There is a term in the CNC and manual machine shop world called a “job shop”. Job shops may be a company in the middle of nowhere that has a couple CNC machines and 12 employees, but they only have enough work in their core line of business to do one or two shifts.

When they contract with Sig Sauer, or Daniel Defense, or some other manufacturer to machine parts to specification, they do so to pay their bills, like machine payments and payroll. Sometimes job shops don’t even make money on all their contracts. 

Seems counter-intuitive, but a job shop might actually lose significant money on an ongoing operation, so that they are in the pipeline for other jobs from other brands. Say Sig Sauer asks Joe Blow’s Job Shop in Jupiter, Florida to make bolts and carriers for $19.

They cost $12 in materials and labor and machine costs to mill and key slot. Then they send them to job shop #2 to get heat treated and then oxide treated, so they match the factory color and specifications.

Job Shop #2 charges Joe Blow’s Job Shop $8 to do the finish work and bring the bolts and carriers to specification, then ships them on to Sig. That’s $20 that Joe Blow’s Job Shop is into the bolt for, and Sig gets them delivered for $19, all-in.  

But then Joe Blow can pay his payment on his machines with the extra cash flow. He can continue to employ those 12 employees. He can keep the lights on. Joe Blow – the proprietor of Joe Blow’s Job Shop can now approach another manufacturer and pitch them on bolts and carriers for $24 all in.

And because he is able to add additional volume to Job Shop #2’s workflow that is already profitable for them, they can get the total cost down to $6.25 for bolt/carrier. Now, not only is Joe Blow making $5.75 profit on selling to the second manufacturer, but he is making 75 cents from Sig per combo too (where he was losing money temporarily before). Joe Blow rinses and repeats. 

Sig doesn’t care, because they have favorable terms on the money they spend on the parts; favorable terms extended by Joe Blow, and they don’t pay anything for freight. The ever-extending credit lines keep the manufacturer operating at a profit.

All that, and they don’t have to spend on CapEx to build out more factory floor space unless they want to. They can ramp up production when they find good partners, and the manufacturer (Sig in this hypothetical case) risks nothing in a market downturn, except the latest parts order. 

Making The Case for Buying A Factory AR

It’s a hard sell to a lot of AR people to tell them they might be better off going for a factory complete and proven solution, instead of building on their own. But there are a lot of reasons to consider it. 

• Right now, even after the parts supply has begun to return to a little bit better than during late 2019 and all of 2020 and part of 2021, it’s still hard to find certain parts. Factories get first dibs because they have long standing contracts with component parts makers
• The guns are tuned from factory, built to an exacting spec that has teams of people using standardized processes and a legitimate QC/QA process
• They must be held to a higher standard of care regarding liability, than a home builder – that means that they are headspacing properly, have qualified oversight, torque barrels to a certain amount of pressure and back their product. With a home build, if you mess something up you either must repair it, replace it, or shoot it with some risk or annoyance
• They generally look cohesive, are balanced, and provide reliability that doesn’t have to constantly be dialed in because of the component mix
• The finish is almost always flawless and matches by color, finish texture and durability
• You can get newer releases to access new innovations in the market that may not be ready for the mainstream because they were developed with a collaboration partner or as part of a special R&D project
• Some makers of premium full build rifles ARE the manufacturer of the component mix that satisfies a large portion of your desired components – go get that discount and save your labor
• Easy warranty work or customer servicing compared to trying to collect on 20 different manufacturer’s policies, some of which may go out of business when you need them because they couldn’t maintain a commercially viable operation
• Simplicity, mainstream availability, possible discounts or price reductions for return customers or new buyers
• Promotions

Making The Case for Building Your Own AR

For those that are hardcore into the tinkering and building something that caters exactly to their idea of what they need, it’s almost impossible to convince them to buy a factory complete solution. Here are some reasons that point to the concept of building over buying an AR solution:

• No maker builds what you want to shoot
• You have exacting standards and need a specification that is not adhered to at the factory, but you have the means or tooling and know-how to accomplish the elevated standard
• You already have components you have been saving for a build, and don’t want to increase your costs to get a rifle to completion
• You really enjoy tinkering and have done this before
• You have access to some secret stash of components that are desirable, but not generally available on the market 
• You’re ready to build the ONE GUN, and you have a well laid out plan and the means to achieve your desired result
• You want to machine your own lower, upper or some core component part and make it a unique piece for your private collection
• You cannot find good value currently on the fully-factory-built AR market
• You don’t mind timelines, you just want what you want, and it’s not available yet from the factory

Making The Case for Assembling an Upper Half and A Lower Half of An AR

A complete upper is the obvious choice for someone who has the lower already configured the way they like it and having spent a significant amount of money on that lower setup.

Some upper kits are direct plug-and-play options, where the magazine well is already big enough on the AR15 to accommodate the cartridge, you want to shoot out of the gun after you put the upper on it. An example would be 6.9SPC or .300BLK, or something else that is a smaller overall case length. 

If this is what you want to do, the upper receiver assembly route could be the best bang for your buck because they are proven reliable, generally; offer better value, and are more available sometimes than all the component parts you may desire. 

If you want a monolithic matching set, this is also another good reason to get an upper and a lower – though you’ll probably be building from that point on, since most monolithic receivers are paired already and made specifically for barebones builds and mated as a brand pair. 

If you are ready now, and don’t want to wait – there are a lot of upper receiver assemblies on the market at good price points, and this is a no-brainer. 

If you want to be sold on this concept, look no further than the (hundreds of thousands to) millions of drop-in conversions and top ends that have been purchased in the past year.

Right now, is a good time to buy a complete upper as the components market is still stuck in supply chain purgatory and has yet to return with any sustainability after a rough couple of years, but the availability of fully assembled factory offerings of uppers is pretty decent.

Things You May Not Be Thinking About When You Are Grabbing an Upper and A Lower Sight-Unseen, And Assembling Them Together to Form You Hybrid Firearm

• Not all finishes are created equally. Even if they are both premium finishes, the colors in anodizing and oxide treating of aluminum and steel (respectively) vary by batch, so it may not even be a lesser quality job, just that it’s done at a different time, with a different amount of time in the chemical batch, and with slightly different solution mixture ratios
• Specs can be off by a few thousandths of an inch, and when paired together, look like a nightmare – like a gap between the two halves of a receiver
• Make sure you know which platform you need to be using for your desired upper or lower. If you own a AR-10/.308 AR platform upper or lower, it will need to be paired with one of the same style. This might include adding an upper to shoot 6.5 Creedmoor, which requires a .308 lower setup
• You may need to change the bolt and carrier (if you buy a fully assembled kit for the upper you won’t have to worry about this)
• You will still need to do basic safety inspections and checks like headspace gauging and gas system work

What You Should Be Aware of From a Safety Perspective

If you decide to build rather than to buy, make sure you are using component parts that meet the minimum necessary specifications. Here are some obvious ones:

• Check headspacing
• Make sure if you plan to shoot 5.56, you’re using a 5.56 capable barrel configuration which could be a .223 Wylde or a stamped 5.56 capable barrel
• If you’re shooting a .223 Remington out of a 5.56 barrel, you won’t generally have any safety issues, but you may be losing significant accuracy
• If you plan to shoot longer bullets, make sure you have an adequate chambering and appropriate inner dimensions on the freebore and leade
• Gas system adjustments need to be dialed in – read about those systems if you are mating uppers to lowers and make sure you test with the right conditions for reliability and safety
• Check for damage to the direct impingement system components during shipping – a bent gas tube can cause a problem and they are not particularly robust when uncovered and can bend easily 
• Check for free movement on bolt and carrier and for proper seating into the breech face for all necessary components
• Also check the barrel for machining debris and to ensure it is free from obstruction
• Remove excess oil or grease, especially on the upper receiver components and inside the muzzle brake, etc.
• Consider doing a full clean and lubricating lightly before you shoot the firearm and after your safety checks

Do a final basic safety check prior to shooting – and this is a good idea prior to shooting at all, any time. 

• You can check for barrel obstructions or rings, squibs, or gouges in the barrel – a barrel with an anomaly is not safe to shoot – have it checked out by a professional if you notice a bulge, ring or major inclusion like a deep pit
• Check for a loose muzzle device and tighten to torque specs – look for telltale signs of improper harmonics, like bullet tumbling or awkward sounds at projectile exit from the muzzle
• Make sure you are not introducing too much lubrication into the firearm, especially in line with the bore
• Check for adequate magazine spring tension and for a fully functional buffer tube assembly or a properly adjusted gas system
• Make sure you do not have a loose barrel nut or handguards/tube that is not tightened or has excess movement
• Check the bolt face for any deterioration and the extractor and breech lockup for hard debris, including impacted unburnt powder residue or pieces of brass or copper or built-up lead
• Look for signs of bullet shaving, which may indicate an improper lockup at the breech or poor-quality ammunition or a bad fitment on the upper and lower groups

Who’s A Good Candidate for A Factory AR?

Do you like a specific look, the specifications on a brand’s specific model, or you want to own something with that name brand on it? Buy factory. You won’t be disappointed.

Have you been coveting a very rare model that is hard or expensive to build anyway, and you have a chance to pay at or near retail price for the factory version? Buy Factory. You won’t be disappointed

Do you need to guarantee safety, liability, accuracy/precision, and cannot do that confidently with your given tools and skillsets? Buy Factory. You won’t be disappointed.

Do you live in a state that has very restrictive gun laws surrounding AR’s? Buy factory to ensure that you have compliance. You will be disappointed, but you won’t be an edge case suitable for a long protracted fight with the ATF and DOJ.  

Do you have tools, knowhow, understanding of how to check headspace, and tune gas systems, a good vise, and a few hours of time on your hands? Don’t buy factory. You’ll ultimately be disappointed. At least don’t always buy factory, that is.

Have you already tinkered with your factory AR’s and feel very confident that you can get swept away in the spending spree and logistic nightmare that usually comes with a fantasy build? You are not a good candidate for a factory build, unless it’s something that is highly coveted like a HK 416 or something like that. In that case, buy factory and build. You like what you like. 

In Conclusion

This article isn’t meant to tell you that you must fall in line with our recommendations – it’s years of experience that leads to knowing where customers see regret in their decisions because they were uninformed on when it makes sense to favor one option over the other.

In the case of building an AR – it’s fun, a good learning experience and can be helpful in understanding your own preferences, but it can also be a money pit. And when you buy, you will rarely regret getting a solid offering out of the box without any rigging, or testing, or tooling.

And there is always a 2nd, 3rd or fourth AR to build, so you can always experiment later if you want to play it safe the first time. 

The post Is It Better to Go Factory or Build a One-Off AR-15? first appeared on The New Rifleman.

The question now becomes is the platform capable of holding the tightest tolerances and delivering down range for sub minute of angle accuracy, the likes of which has only been expected out of bolt actions, prior to this. After all, you can get a brand new conversion upper receiver in an incredibly accurate cartridge like the 6.5 Creedmoor relatively inexpensively and that cartridge is certainly capable of shooting sub minute of angle easily.

Already proven exceptionally competent in the hunting space, both the AR-15 which prioritizes a shorter cartridge, and the AR-10 which adds the ability to access longer cartridges have performed admirably. But dispatching an Elk at 400 yards is a lot different than trying to shoot a half minute of angle at 600.

The Kill Zone on an elk or a deer or another large game animal is probably as much as 9 to 13 inches (not to mention there are multiple areas to aim for). The same shot to hold a minute of angle needs to be under 6 inches at 600 yd. Or, for 1/2 minute of angle it’s 3 inches at 600 yards, and a quarter minute of angle is an inch and a half at the same distance.

Let’s be clear: anyone expecting a quarter minute of angle out of any gun is going to spend thousands of dollars, and it’s likely there is no better platform than a bolt action for such an endeavor. Anyone arguing against that, isn’t accounting for reality.  

When you need that type of accuracy you aren’t taking shots quickly in succession and likely do not need semi-automatic actions. There are also inherent benefits to using a bolt action for shots taken at that range, including ergonomics, optics mounting, and ultimately weight and tolerances, etc. Not only that, but the platform lends itself well to monolithic, precision builds with fewer components and less overall optimization to achieve excellent long range results.

What’s a reasonable expectation from a “long range precision rifle”?

Let’s start by dispelling some myths about long range precision shooting. 

It’s not inexpensive. 

To shoot 1/4 minute of angle or the equivalent in mils, is ridiculously hard to achieve. Historically, long range precision shooting has been in the realm of people who could afford it. And there is a reason: it costs a lot of time and a lot of money to dial-in loads, guns, ranges, and conditions each time you shoot. Long range precision optics are expensive; modifying already expensive guns is expensive.

Forget about just the economic parts of the equation, it’s difficult to find hardware and create loads that consistently outperform all competition on the market. A long-range precision rifle where it was once comfortable sub minute of angle, is now in the realm of sub 1/2 minute of angle.

To even meet that threshold is exceptionally difficult. Most shooters don’t have the skillset to consistently shoot at 1/2 minute of angle – taking nothing away from the obviously well-read and skilled readers of this website. 

This isn’t a lecture, however there might be some interesting concepts or ‘food for thought’ within the context. One could make the argument, and probably should make the argument that anything sub 1 minute of angle consistently out at long distances, is where long range precision rifle shooting should be positioned.

One could also make the argument that sub 1/2 minute of angle at long ranges is the goal to shoot for.

Because of the proliferation of long-range precision shooting forums and other online and communication advances, it almost seems that the long range precision shooting story has become similar to the “fish that got away” story. Not everyone is always shooting a quarter minute of angle at 500 yards. That’s simply unrealistic.

Let’s take for instance the case for a caliber that many people are shooting at long range distances and pushing the limits of precision. Let’s say you’re shooting a .338 Lapua Magnum. Certainly, this cartridge has the range and the terminal ballistics to take out just about any target at more than a thousand yards, and even more than 1,500 yards in many situations. 

The problem is that the very diameter of the caliber means that two shots placed edge-to-edge next to each other, by anyone’s determination a fantastic 2-shot grouping, would still equal more than .700 of an inch.

That’s a 3/4 minute angle group at 100 yards. To say that a vast majority of shooters are consistently shooting 2 Shot or 3 shot groups at under .700 an inch (equivalent) at anything more than 150-250 yards is a bit of a stretch.

For full transparency, it’s not all that difficult to shoot sub 1MOA at 100 yards. Maybe not even at 300 yards, but it gets harder the further you go out. Ballistics do factor into the equation. 

Of course, you can achieve this with smaller calibers, or over shorter ranges. The .338 Lapua will easily shoot sub 1 minute of angle up to 1,000 yards in the right platform. It’s built to do that. Even the cheapest examples of bolt action rifles in that caliber tend to be quite accurate. 

If you were to do the same thing with a 6.5 Creedmoor at 600 or 700 or 800 yards, you can expect similar results. It absolutely can be achieved. But to think that it’s being achieved all the time, every time at those ranges, regardless of what the conditions are, seems a bit unrealistic.

Similarly, publications like blog posts or YouTube videos may also be a bit irresponsible by showing the best three shot group out of 150 shots, that complement the authors capabilities.

Just because a gun is capable of shooting sub half minute of angle doesn’t mean that it’s happening every single time.

So, let’s just set the record straight and make a realistic comparison to what is actually happening when you take a gun out to the range for long range shooting, at least for the purposes of this article. Furthermore, for the following discussion, it would be irresponsible not to talk about the truths of building a long-range precision rifle on the AR platform. Before we get into the specifics of such an endeavor, let’s just be transparent with the facts:

• It’s going to be incredibly expensive
• Your AR is likely, going to be front-heavy
• Forget that it’s just going to be front-heavy, it’s going to be heavier all-over than a bolt-action generally, because you must add a lot of components and a lot of barrel weight; you may even need to balance the rear end of the firearm as well
• It’s going to be hard to source the right parts during some parts of the year
• You’re going to need to know how to build an AR well
• Over time, the AR platform is not going to hold up as well (from a tolerance perspective) as a more robust firearm will
• Tolerances are not what an AR is built for, and while you can modify one to achieve excellent tolerances, they are never going to be on the level of a bolt-action firearm – at least not from a precision hardware perspective
• Optimizing loads and barrels become more important – unfortunately for the AR platform, many of the best optimization combinations aren’t available

Having said all that, it is not impossible to build an AR-15 to an exacting standard and have it be in the same realm of competition as a bolt-action firearm for many long-range precision shooting needs. 

Simply put it will be an undertaking, however.

Historically, how have long-range Precision rifles been judged and implemented by the shooter?

If you’re Talking about benchrest that’s one thing, but for general-purpose long range shooting, it’s usually been the undertaking of a highly modified bolt action rifle if you needed to get past 750 yards.

Fortunately, for shooters nowadays, factories have implemented automatic procedures, high tolerance machining and high-end, optimized engineering processes that make reaching precision goals from a hardware perspective much more available to those with less budget relative to historical shooters.

This is especially true when it comes to the AR-15 or the AR-10. Factories producing these platforms generally have invested heavily in high end 5 axis machine tool technologies or other substantially similar technologies that make precision on the hardware and manufacturing side very consistent and push high-tolerance machining into the mainstream.

When you look through the historical lens however, almost everything beyond 400 yards has been done with bolt actions from hunting to competition previous to now. Of course, you’d have a few modified M1A’s, or similar, but the AR was never truly competitive until the last decade or so.

The word “competitive” as mentioned above, may not have a one-to-one correlation in many precision shooter’s minds, however.  Benchrest shooters have been achieving sub half minute of angle accuracy for decades. One couldn’t reasonably obtain such accuracy out of the AR platform until about 10 years ago. Even then, the cartridges associated with the most mainstream long range precision components weren’t pushing the envelope for sub half minute of angle.

With the huge increase in mainstream shooters’ interest in shooting competitions on a regular basis, the AR-15 has had to evolve, and the AR-10, specifically, has found a nice spot in the up to 750 yards arena.

What’s possible with an AR-15 from a long-range perspective?

If you’re looking at the AR-15 for a possible sub half minute of angle shooting firearm, you’re likely not going to get past 600 yards very easily. A combination of factors limits this.  Some of those factors are listed below, though this list is not comprehensive.

• Smaller cartridges lack the necessary bulk of powder in order to reach ballistic needs past this point (600 yd) and bullet drops create difficulty cementing sub half minute of angle past that point
• Even if you have a cartridge That could reach out past the 600 yard range, the optimal barrel length would likely not make sense for an AR-15
• Compensation for wind or bullet drop can be difficult for smaller projectiles
• The gun hasn’t been built to do this specific task, generally
• The cost to make an AR-15 reach out past those distances with the type of precision groups that a long-range precision shooter is desiring is high

Notwithstanding, if choosing the right caliber to build an AR-15 on, you can achieve results past 600 yards, but it won’t be super consistent without heavy attention to detail, constant tweaking, and it will be expensive.

For instance, you might look at some of the newer releases in the caliber realm for the AR-15, including the 6.5 Grendel, the .300 Hamr, and the .224 Valkyrie.

If you were to optimize the barrel twist, barrel length and the connection between the two receivers, and the barrel fitment, it’s likely you could find a gun that would shoot 400 to 600 yards with relative consistency and be approaching half minute of angle.

Looking much past 600 yards, you’re not going to find any caliber or set up that is going to consistently drive tacks at sub half minute of angle. 

Even if you do have a gun capable of doing that, you may have spent way too much to build it to do so on the AR-15 platform. Subsequently, you will also have the issue with the fact that the aluminum chassis of the AR-15 will eventually wear, and tolerances will begin to expose the inherent weaknesses in building a long-range precision rifle on a two-part platform.

The key here is the desire to do it on the platform, and the goal of not overusing the gun without appropriately compensating for the extra volume of rounds. 

Given all that information, it would be possible to build a gun that would not have a huge volume of ammunition shot through it, that is capable of long-range precision shooting. Most long-range precision shooters do not shoot huge volumes unless they are practicing for competition year-round. So, this may be a viable option for some.

What’s possible with an AR-10 from a long-range perspective?

The same may not be true for the AR-10 or other .308 Winchester based AR platforms. When you have the ability to move up in cartridge length, you have the ability to add volume of powder, pressure in the chamber, and support for a larger and longer, heavier barrel. Also, the AR-10 and substantially similar platforms that are clones of that rifle are geared towards more accuracy potential out of the box.

With the 6.5 Creedmoor having come online in the marketplace and having proven itself as an accurate and reliable long-term option, the makers of AR-10 components, full rifles, and particularly barrels which are chambered with extreme accuracy, it is entirely possible to compete at the half minute of angle Mark out to nearly 850 yards. 

Beyond that point you need to do a lot of things to a gun to be able to expect absolute consistency that can keep up with something like the monolithic build style of a bolt action rifle. There are diminishing returns past that point. Can it be done? Yes. Is it cheap?  No. Is it easy to source all the parts, put them together and maintain them at high tolerances over the long term? Not as easy as it is with a bolt-action.

The .308 Winchester cartridge, similarly, can be made to shoot quite accurately at up to 750 yd. Beyond that point specialty ammunition and high-end barrel dynamics will need to be implemented to ensure consistency.

As the AR-15’s popularity continues to grow, and the AR-10 proves itself as a legitimate long-range contender, platforms like the AR-15 and the AR-10 specifically, are going to be able to accept a wider range of long-range precision cartridges eventually. 

This may manifest only in a one-off format, but the market will make it available if there is enough desire from those who are buying.

You can already see one-off versions of the 300 Winchester Magnum and other rifle cartridges that would normally be in the realm of a long action bolt action rifle.

Can you even be competitive with an AR platform?

To be competitive one doesn’t need the best rifle in the world. However, what you lack in Long Range Precision from a hardware perspective, you must make up for from a “skill-set” perspective. The better the shooter the more capable they are of hitting a long-range precision target properly and consistently. 

In most competitions currently across the shooting landscape, you don’t need to shoot sub half minute of angle generally. In fact, there are many competitors that are winning or coming close to winning major competitions that aren’t even shooting guns capable of hitting half minute of angle over the long-term consistently.

This is because most of the competitions involve movement, or there are large budgets and very astute shooters using these firearms that aren’t otherwise built on bolt-action platforms.

Leveling the playing field between a bolt gun and the AR platform

Where do you start to level the playing field when you are looking to shoot at the same accuracy plane as a bolt-action firearm? The following is a list of items that may help to improve accuracy over the long-term consistently when implemented properly. Some are hardware-related, and some are skills related.

• Finding a monolithically built matched set of receivers
• Building the rifle in a caliber or for a cartridge that you know you can tune to the accuracy level you desire
• Pairing those receivers with a high-end barrel with the right twist rate and the right length to optimize specific loads that you’ve already proven out
• Adding a long-range optic that can help you harness the best potential from your existing skill set
• Practice, practice, practice
• Shooting in competitions that don’t rely on benchrest positions
• Investing in a quality bipod
• Optimizing loads that can mitigate issues that show up on the range in the environment you’re shooting in (e.g., severe side winds)
• Customizing your rifle built on the AR platform to ensure that it is heavier, more balanced, and able to optimize for other variables that come into play, including recoil, etc.

Conclusions about shooting long range with an AR-15 or an AR-10

Making a rifle that can keep up with the best bolt actions is possible with the right mindset, budget, and tooling. But the bigger question at that point may be, is it worth it to you?

There is also a binary concept that rides the line of what the user considers to be “on-par” with a bolt action. It’s not too difficult to build an AR that can outshoot a bargain basement product offering from a second tier bolt action maker out of the factory, but at what cost?

If you consider the threshold to be 1MOA and shoot to 400 yards, this is a relatively straightforward endeavor, but if you want benchrest type accuracy to 1500 yards, you should look elsewhere.

The reason one builds the AR to an exacting standard is very much centered around the goals of the individual. Bragging rights go a long way for some folks, but for the money, you can probably produce better results from a $1500 factory bolt action, than you can from a $4500 custom built showpiece of an AR. 

All that said, the valley between these two specimens is contracting. There is likely to be a day of reckoning, or a new killer app or add-on that pushes the AR into the realm of the highly accurate at some point in the future. In the end, if you are ready to spend, you can see your AR precision long range dreams come true right now.

Thank you to our guest author Benjamin for this contribution!

Lothaen – Out!

The post Long Range Precision Shooting: Can the AR-15 and AR-10 be Included in the Discussion? first appeared on The New Rifleman.

Being that most retro buyers are VERY picky, we could start to see offerings from H&R that will reflect what the retro market wants; retro clones correct to the tiniest detail. H&R was one of a handful of contractors who produced the M16A1, and now they will likely be reborn, with proper markings.

See the small statement from Nodak Spud Here.

The post Nodak Spud Joins PSA Under Harrington and Richardson Banner: first appeared on The New Rifleman.

compact enough to be unobtrusive, slick, and leave room for back up iron sights… if you insist on them. I don’t.

If you right click any photo, you can open it up full size for more detail.

Texas-based Primary Arms has released its second generation Cyclops 1x prism sight and I have had the opportunity to test a pre-production model for several months.  I’ll give you the bottom line at the top. Can it replace a red dot? I think it can, for several reasons…  and it has replaced them, at least for me.  I directly purchased several of these new prism optics to replace my own red dot sights.  This optic is a best-case hybrid between a mini-ACOG and an Aimpoint Mini-red dot. Let’s take a look:

Overview

The second generation SLx (Silver Line series) Cyclops is a 1x (no magnification) optic that uses a prism and lenses like an ACOG, but has a user-adjustable battery illumination like an Aimpoint for its etched reticle.  It uses the simple chevron and outer horseshoe ACSS reticle that was pioneered by Primary Arms.  The red reticle is daylight bright and can still be used if the battery dies or it is turned off. I believe a green reticle is also in the works. The illumination is auto-live, meaning it turns off after a while and will then turn on again with movement, and also features three night-vision settings. It is strikingly different from the first generation Cyclops, with a larger reticle inside, half the size outside, and a much improved mount and spacing system. The windage and elevation turrets are now recessed and uncapped, each giving a tactile 1 MOA adjustment per click.  The included robust mount uses two recessed clamping screws, has 8 different riser height options, an add-on AR carry handle riser (although one of the included risers will work for that too), and uses the mini-ACOG mounting footprint if an aftermarket mount is desired. Field of view is about 75 feet at 100 yards and the adjustable diopter allows an exact 1x magnification so that the interior image is seamless with the outside world.

Everything you need in the box, including a nice torx wrench and threadlock pre-installed on all the screws.

This shows the size of the reticle compared to the full field of view. the chevron is easily distinguished, unlike the reticle on the Gen 1 cyclops.

My pre-production model has seven settings. The Production model has ten.

Capless, streamlined turrets and an adjustable rear diopter ring.

Mini-ACOG mount footprint pattern

Two strong Torx cross bolts, three mounting bolts, all mating with steel integrated nuts, and two rail lugs. It’s not moving.

This specific carry-handle mount purchased separately sits the optic high enough to dial up the iron sights if you wanted to and has a channel to see them through the mount. The included high cantilever mount also has a see through channel and sits lower, so that works too.

Key Benefits

I want to highlight three qualities that make this optic superior in its class.  They are the etched reticle with adjustable diopter, increased image clarity vs a standard red dot, and user-adjustable brightness.  I am nearing 50 years old and wear glasses.  An optic is almost a necessity for me, and for years I went back and forth between a mini-Aimpoint and a mini-ACOG (TA-45). I was not satisfied with either one. The Aimpoint red dot allowed me to control the dot brightness and was superb for speedy work up close, but the image through the optic was relatively dim, the dot was out of focus due to my astigmatism, and if the battery died or had an electrical problem (which did happen once), I was bereft. The ACOG offered a brighter image (more on this later), and an etched reticle that was a bit more in focus, but I could not control the reticle brightness and had trouble when shooting from a dark interior to a bright target area.  What I needed was an optic that had the benefits of both systems with none of the liabilities, and the PA Gen 2 Cyclops does that.

First of all, the Gen 2 Cyclops has an easily seen, etched reticle with an adjustable diopter.  I did not know how much I needed an adjustable diopter until I actually looked through one. I have mild astigmatism that makes red dots look like a crooked Venn diagram.  The ACOG was an improvement, but the small reticle was still a bit blurry at the edges because it was made for a person with 20/20 vision and could not be made to focus exactly for my eye and prescription glasses.  With the diopter adjusted properly, I can get the Gen 2 Cyclops reticle as sharp as I have ever seen one, and the image exactly proportioned to be a true 1.0x, the image inside the optic seamlessly merging with the outside world.

Seamless 1x magnification

Secondly, the prism optic offers greater clarity of image compared to a red dot.  This seems to be contradictory at first.  Doesn’t a 1x red dot offer the same image that a 1x prism does, both having the same magnification?  In terms of image size, yes, but in terms of image clarity, no. The red dot does not focus or alter the path of the light that goes through the tube, it simply puts a dot on the target.  You only have as much light entering your eye as your pupil will allow, which is about 4 mm in diameter in daylight. A lensatic optic, like the Cyclops, collects light from an objective lens that is much larger than your pupil and “funnels” it into your eye… which is why a hunting scope with a very large objective lens is best for hunting at dusk as it makes the image intensity brighter, regardless of magnification.  I noticed this when I switched from the red dot to the mini ACOG years ago.  The image clarity seen at distance was greatly improved, more than just the 1.5x magnification could account for.  The detail that I could not see with the red dot, or the naked eye, was visible through the lensatic optic because the image was brighter, and sometimes this meant the difference between the ability to identify the target from the background or not.  You can’t effectively shoot what you can’t effectively identify.  The PA Gen 2 Cyclops has an objective lens of about 17 mm, meaning almost four times the size of your pupil.  Imagine your pupil opening up to the size of a penny; could you see better?  So even though they have the same magnification level, the Cyclops offers a superior image, which is bright and crisp.  See the comparison photo between the Cyclops and the Aimpoint in the section below if you doubt me.

at 250 yards. The reticle is blooming a bit, it’s so bright

All of these pictures, ALL of them, were taken with an old iPhone camera. The glass quality is even better in person.

And third, the Cyclops offers user-adjustable illumination.  This is the feature that is lacking with most ACOGs. The tritium-only and fiber optic ACOGs are fantastic optics until you try to use one looking from a dark location into a brightly lit area.  The reticle washes out and there is no way to reasonably make it bright enough to compete with the bright outside image. If the reticle can’t be seen, what good is the optic?  Also, sometimes outside in the sun, the ACOG’s reticle is too bright and it blooms.  I’ve seen “dimmers” that cover up the fiber optic strip for use in bright sunshine, but I’ve yet to see a “brightener” for the opposite problem.  The Primary Arms Cyclops gives an ACOG-like optic with the added benefit of constant and controllable illumination.

illuminated reticle in the full Florida sun, both in light and dark backgrounds

When non-illuminated, the reticle can disappear in a dark background

But with user controlled illumination, no problem

Range Report

I took the Gen 2 Cyclops to the range at least a half dozen times, both to indoor and outdoor ranges.  I sighted the Gen 2 in at an indoor range and zeroed the optic with a 50 yard zero at the top of the chevron per the instructions. Adjustment was easy with the large printed directions on the turret and tactile and audible clicks between settings. Next, I took it to a few local “action” matches that involved a lot of movement and targets within 25 yards.  It took a bit of thinking to mentally switch to using the larger horseshoe from the pinpoint dot of the Aimpoint, but very quickly I adapted and was running the Cyclops just as fast.  The image was clear and seamless with the outside world, and the daylight illumination worked fine here in the central Florida sun. Even though the Cyclops is not as nuclear bright as an Aimpoint, it does not have to be because the reticle has some thickness to it rather than just a single point. This makes it much easier to see than simply a pinprick dot. I don’t think I was lacking any speed compared to the red dot.  I also shot the Gen 2 Cyclops at 200 and 300 yard steel torso targets, both full-sized and reduced.  I was able to hit both the larger and smaller steel plates with ease, and to my utter surprise, I was able to hit a 12-inch round steel plate at 300 yards consistently shooting prone off a bag with some concentration and discipline.  The ACSS reticle holdover for 300 is spot-on.  I asked several other people to try the Gen 2 at 200 and 300 yards, both experienced and novice shooters, and all of them were able to understand how the reticle worked and hit the small plate.  One guy in particular was irritated that he could not buy one immediately since they had not been released yet. He wanted one NOW.

Awkward 200 yard engagement. No problem. The eye relief is very forgiving. I could mount it at the front of the receiver and have no difficulty.

300 yard line. A black full sized torso target is seen as a speck on the right side of the white sand berm. the 12-inch plate cannot be seen here, but it WAS seen, and engaged, through the optic.

Small torso target easily engaged at 300 yards

What follows is a direct comparison between the PA Gen 2 Cyclops and some other competitors in its genre.

Gen 2 to Gen 1 Cyclops:

The same manufacturer and same optic line?  Yes. Versus the Primary Arms Gen 1 Cyclops, the Gen 2 is superior in many respects.  The glass quality appears to be the same between the two, which is very good… but the Gen 2 is shorter in length, lighter, more streamlined, has a larger, and therefore useable, reticle, and has a more robust, adjustable mount.  One of the chief complaints about the Gen 1 was that the reticle was too small, so much that the inner chevron was effectively unusable.  As you can see, Gen 2 offers a larger center reticle.  More than just a superficial upgrade, the Gen 2 is a fundamentally reimagined and upgraded optic.

Notice the Gen 2 ring matches the size of the center ring on the target. I don’t know what the use of that observation is, but I did notice it.

PA Gen 2 Cyclops to Aimpoint

Versus the Aimpoint mini-red dot, the PA Gen 2 cyclops is superior in having an etched reticle that can be used without battery power, greatly increased brightness of the image, and an increased field of view. The Cyclops is also less than half the price of the Aimpoint.  The advantages I see for the Aimpoint is in proven ruggedness and in battery life.  The Cyclops might be as rugged, but that has yet to be seen, and it only offers 29k hours of battery life compared to 50k on this older Aimpoint.

Sorry about the Aimpoint OFF photo, but the illumination IS off, so good luck with that.

PA Gen 2 Cyclops to Bushnell Lil P

Versus the Bushnell Lil P, the PA Gen 2 Cyclops is superior in having a brighter illuminated reticle, brighter image due to a larger objective lens, larger field of view, and range finding marks.  The Lil P is significantly smaller and that is its key feature.  I don’t know of any lensatic sight that is as ridiculously small as the Lil P.  Unfortunately, Bushnell has discontinued it.

PA SLx Gen 2 Cyclops to PA GLx 2x Prism

Same manufacturer but different optic line? Let’s have a look. Versus the PA GLx 2x,  the SLx 1x Cyclops is superior in size and in speed when used in close-range shooting.  It is also much less expensive than the “Gold Line” optic.  The GLx 2x has better glass quality and higher magnification and is more suited for distance work.  My GLx 2x optic will go on a dedicated hunting rifle.

Finale

The Primary Arms Gen 2 Cyclops solves a lot of problems for me, and it’s now my go-to optic for a general-purpose rifle.  I’ve now bought several more since they have been released and they have replaced red dots. I no longer own my old TA-45 ACOG. Both the Aimpoint and the mini-ACOG are excellent optics, but the companies have been stuck in a rut for a while, living off government contracts and a well-earned reputation. They have not innovated and their features have remained the same for decades.  Companies like Primary Arms that have to constantly compete and innovate to stay in business have now taken these classic optic designs and have improved upon them.  I think this new Gen 2 Cyclops 1x prism optic merges the best features of the Aimpoint red dot and the mini-ACOG is therefore the best optic available for a duty rifle.

the optic can be found on Primary Arms’ website here

I trust the SLx Gen 2 enough to not use back up iron sights

Editor: Special thanks to PA for sending an optic for review. TNR has NO financial relationship with Primary Arms. We received no compensation for the above review. All thoughts are the authors and the authors alone. We do not receive referral income in any way shape or form, whatsoever, from PA or any PA-affiliated referral programs.

Thanks Theoden for another great review!

The post Primary Arms SLx 1x Prism Gen 2- Can it Replace a Red Dot? first appeared on The New Rifleman.