I read that semi auto rifles are harder then a bolt action to shoot, because there is a second recoil when the bolt reciprocates that can throw off your shot, if your shooting skills aren't absolutely perfect. Is this true? Doesn't the round leave the barrel before the bolt reciprocates?
- Thread starter brandon
- Start date
I've always wanted to see a clear, high speed video that will either prove or disprove whether or not the bullet leaves the muzzle before the BCG begins to unlock. If the bullet exits the muzzle prior to BCG moving, then the recoil pulse from the action opening would have no effect at all.
Semi auto's are definitely far less forgiving of bad technique. My theory is that it is related to lock time, as an AR certainly "shouldn't" be unlocking until after the bullet leaves the muzzle.
Lock time is the time it takes the firing pin to strike the primer after pulling the trigger. On bolt rifle, the pin (striker) is spring loaded and begins traveling as soon as the trigger breaks. On a semi, the hammer has to accelerate into the pin before the pin begins to move, hence the longer lock time.
Lock time is the time it takes the firing pin to strike the primer after pulling the trigger. On bolt rifle, the pin (striker) is spring loaded and begins traveling as soon as the trigger breaks. On a semi, the hammer has to accelerate into the pin before the pin begins to move, hence the longer lock time.
What I can tell you is that I shoot semi-auto gas guns more A LOT more than I shoot bolt guns and I'm more consistent with bolt guns. I can have bad days where I can't even group my match AR and other days when I can shoot sub-1/2 MOA groups with it. My impression is that all the moving parts as well as the loose tolerances between the upper/lower make it so the shooter must be on their game at all times to shoot well. The shooter must be consistent in how the mount the gun, the pressure on the grip and into the shoulder all add up to making good hits. Where as I can mount the bolt gun with a lighter pull that is easier to get consistent with a lighter grip that is easy to get consistent which all adds up to a more consistent level of shooting on the bolt gun. Or maybe I'm just mind F'ing the whole process to death and psyching myself out. That's my take....
One would think that a chamber pressure of aprox. 50,000+ psi compared to 10 to 12 thou in the gas system "M1A" that the bullet would be long gone before the bolt had any effect on the shot.. My 2 cents. 
Pete
Pete
IMO the top notch semi's are just not as accurate as the top notch bolt actions and less forgiving of bad technique.
I think the problem here is that semi's are usually way easier to shoot and that leads to many failings in the perfection of ones marksmanship. Whereas with the bolt gun, one always has in the back of his mind that no matter how fast he cycles the bolt, it's not as fast as a semi, and focuses better on the first shot.
I will say with an AR built up the right way for the shooter, they have absolutely amazed me at how well they shoot. I have never personally taken an AR to the ranges that I've taken a bolt gun to, but out to 1400 yds. was holding pretty close to what a bolt gun was doing for accuracy. That was a 6.5G in the AR and 7mm-08 in the bolt gun.
I've also had and seen a well built AR shot 1/4 moa groups quite consistently @ 100 and 200 yds. So, to me the proof is in the pudding that a well built AR and bolt gun are pretty close to the same accuracy.
As for the mechanics of the AR degrading accuracy, I could see it in a load that wasn't matched to the rifle. While this is true with bolt guns as well, you pretty much only have to worry about barrel harmonics. In an AR you have to worry about barrel harmonics and how well the load matches gas path length and how that affects the BCG unlocking (possibly premature). A good example is people using RE-15 with light to mid-weight bullets. Too little pressure = too slow of initial velocity, which translates into too much dwell time for the bullet in the barrel. As the bullet passes the port, pressure enters the port and goes back through the gas tube. Which unlocks the BCG. If the bullet has dwelled too long in the barrel, this pressure, which uses the bullet as a dynamic seal, (moving seal as opposed to stationary) will give too much pressure back and want to unlock the BCG while there is still barrel pressure holding the lugs of the bolt tight against the lugs of the barrel extension. In order for an AR to work correctly, the gas pulse has to be quick. It also has to be timed to hit the BCG after the bullet has left the barrel.
If any of that makes sense...
I will say with an AR built up the right way for the shooter, they have absolutely amazed me at how well they shoot. I have never personally taken an AR to the ranges that I've taken a bolt gun to, but out to 1400 yds. was holding pretty close to what a bolt gun was doing for accuracy. That was a 6.5G in the AR and 7mm-08 in the bolt gun.
I've also had and seen a well built AR shot 1/4 moa groups quite consistently @ 100 and 200 yds. So, to me the proof is in the pudding that a well built AR and bolt gun are pretty close to the same accuracy.
As for the mechanics of the AR degrading accuracy, I could see it in a load that wasn't matched to the rifle. While this is true with bolt guns as well, you pretty much only have to worry about barrel harmonics. In an AR you have to worry about barrel harmonics and how well the load matches gas path length and how that affects the BCG unlocking (possibly premature). A good example is people using RE-15 with light to mid-weight bullets. Too little pressure = too slow of initial velocity, which translates into too much dwell time for the bullet in the barrel. As the bullet passes the port, pressure enters the port and goes back through the gas tube. Which unlocks the BCG. If the bullet has dwelled too long in the barrel, this pressure, which uses the bullet as a dynamic seal, (moving seal as opposed to stationary) will give too much pressure back and want to unlock the BCG while there is still barrel pressure holding the lugs of the bolt tight against the lugs of the barrel extension. In order for an AR to work correctly, the gas pulse has to be quick. It also has to be timed to hit the BCG after the bullet has left the barrel.
If any of that makes sense...
I can't upload the files from the work Engineering servers due to size and firewalls, but I will tell you that I've seen tons of these video's and that the bullet is gone before the carrier starts to move.
I think the biggest 3 mistakes when shooting a semi is (1) most tend to shoot too fast with a semi. (2) proper trigger control, (3) proper follow thru. If you do any of these things wrong even with a bolt gun your accuracy will suffer, even more so with a semi.
Thanks for answering that question.
I'm no expert, so take this with a grain of salt, but I spent the past two years learning to shoot long range using semi's (N6 & GAP-10) because semi's were/are all the rage. Now that I have my AE MKIII, I wish I would have started with a bolt gun to begin with. The fundamentals just come a lot more naturally with a bolt gun. It's hard to explain, but it's like learning to ride a two wheel bike, and then moving on to a bike with training wheels.
I agree. The first time I bought a precision semi auto .308, I was very new to precision rifle shooting. I found it very frustrating, and ended up selling the rifle.
Years later, and 10k or so rounds through a bolt gun, I have gotten into semi auto .308's again. Now, rather than being frustrated (well, still a BIT of frustration) I find the challenge refreshing. Where as a bolt gun had gotten stupid easy to shoot, the .308 semi has made me feel like a beginner all over again. I have shot approaching 1000 rounds of .308 through a gas gun in the last month, I haven't shot that much in years.
Just out of curiosity, have you had a friend (known good shooter) or instructor of known quality give you any feedback on your shooting technique? And any possible remedies for what frustrates you? I mean common things they see often? Often enough anyways to pick up on.
My instructor usually is laughing too hard to give verbal feed back
You mean in general or just since I have started shooting a semi? I have never taken a shooting class with a semi, only a bolt rifle, so no professional instruction there. The guy I shoot with most frequently is very experienced and has not noted anything with my technique.
Honestly, I go back and forth on this and am not really sure if the accuracy I have been getting is as a result of something I am doing as a shooter, or the rifle/load combo. I DO know I have a bit of a recoil anticipation issue. Sometimes I have it with my .338 Lapua as well, but it doesn't effect accuracy to any degree I can notice.
I do know my position is good with correct NPA, my hand position builds correct 90 degree trigger position, and I am keeping firm pressure directly to the rear. Certainly I am not a beginner, but I still am not seeing "sub moa all day long" out of a semi.
I guess without locking the rifle down in a mechanical vise rest, I can't really say how much is me and how much is the rifle.
Lock time is the only reason a semi should be harder to shoot.
When I was actively shooting highpower I started with a Rock River National Match AR15 service rifle. I thought that was hot shit with a Geissele trigger until I got my first custom built match rifle (on a Model 70 action with a Jewell 2 stage trigger and Tubb firing pin and firing pin spring). The improvement in lock time with the bolt gun was dramatic.
Other than that they are both rifles and both need to be driven the same regardless of the action type. That applies whether you are driving them off a sling or off a bipod.
All,
I think the M16 A2/3/4 style semi automatic rifle is easier to shoot than a typical factory stocked bolt gun. That's to say, I can get a more comfortable position with the AR than with other concepts. In fact, I'm more comfortable with my AR than my LR bolt gun, which is fitted with a McMillan Prone Stock, having every conceivable adjustabe feature to make me comfortable. Shooters new to marksmanship in general do not know the importance for a comfortable position; but, really good shooters understand that comfort equals relaxed, and being relaxed means there is less muscular tension to cause unwanted movement and/or inconsistent recoil resistance between shots.
It's inconsistent recoil resistance that precludes most shooters from the best results. With anything less than a position re-built shot to shot with consistent shooter, gun, and ground contact, the angle/arc created between line of bore at rest and line of bore at bullet exit will have a different value. Only when the value is zero will the bullet follow the trajectory of previous rounds. At short distance the inconsistent angle/arc does not have a consequence but at LR it's what keeps most folks from getting an HM card.
Thing is, without formal marksmanship instruction from a highly qualified coach, who actually knows how to do it, the untrained shooter practicing with less than complete knowledge of what's important to good shooting will not likely reach his marksmanship goals in spite of the effort.
The bottom line is a comprehensive understanding for what's important to good shooting makes bolt or auto arguments somewhat moot. A good shooter can get the best results with either.
I think the M16 A2/3/4 style semi automatic rifle is easier to shoot than a typical factory stocked bolt gun. That's to say, I can get a more comfortable position with the AR than with other concepts. In fact, I'm more comfortable with my AR than my LR bolt gun, which is fitted with a McMillan Prone Stock, having every conceivable adjustabe feature to make me comfortable. Shooters new to marksmanship in general do not know the importance for a comfortable position; but, really good shooters understand that comfort equals relaxed, and being relaxed means there is less muscular tension to cause unwanted movement and/or inconsistent recoil resistance between shots.
It's inconsistent recoil resistance that precludes most shooters from the best results. With anything less than a position re-built shot to shot with consistent shooter, gun, and ground contact, the angle/arc created between line of bore at rest and line of bore at bullet exit will have a different value. Only when the value is zero will the bullet follow the trajectory of previous rounds. At short distance the inconsistent angle/arc does not have a consequence but at LR it's what keeps most folks from getting an HM card.
Thing is, without formal marksmanship instruction from a highly qualified coach, who actually knows how to do it, the untrained shooter practicing with less than complete knowledge of what's important to good shooting will not likely reach his marksmanship goals in spite of the effort.
The bottom line is a comprehensive understanding for what's important to good shooting makes bolt or auto arguments somewhat moot. A good shooter can get the best results with either.
Last edited:
In the first place the AR was never developed initially to take the place of a bolt gun. That being said SandWarrior really gives a pretty good answer. The fundamentals of marksmanship remain the same regardless of what weapon you are firing. I have two semi autos that will shoot with two of my GAP bolt guns out to 400 meters. After that the bolt guns are more consistent. What would I take into a tough situation. The Grendel 6.5 DMR. I will kill you faster with well placed multiple shots-just not quite as tight a group.
The AR bolt gun discussion will go on endlessly. I really like them both. For anything over about 600 meters I would prefer a bolt. Under 600 I would take the right AR if we are talking pigs or men.
The AR bolt gun discussion will go on endlessly. I really like them both. For anything over about 600 meters I would prefer a bolt. Under 600 I would take the right AR if we are talking pigs or men.
In theory, AR's should be a bit harder to shoot. That being said, I remember when I was checking the sighting on my Les Baer AR heavy varmint in .204 Ruger. Scope is a 5-25 S&B. My 12 year old daughter walked by and wanted to try it. She got into prone position, and fired 5 shots at about the same rate she would have shot a bolt gun. Target was at 400 yards. Her group was just under 2.5". This was off a bipod. I do not think she has trouble with AR's.
I'd suggest to anyone getting into shooting that they actually get an AR with BDC sights. Learning how to shoot with this sort of rifle forces the novice shooter to come to an understanding for most everything important to good shooting while other types allow for distraction, deception, and detour, especially when fitted with aids serving as marksmanship substitutes.
Last edited:
In case it hasn't already been posted on this thread, I think there's a saying that goes something like this...
"You can ride a bolt rifle, but you must drive a gas rifle."
"You can ride a bolt rifle, but you must drive a gas rifle."
Aside from arousing the curiosity of a novice shooter I don't know how the expression you quoted would actually inspire the novice shooter to learn something about marksmanship before setting out on a quest for good shooting. The truth is, no matter the type of rifle, the relationship between the shooter, gun, and ground must be controlled consistently shot to shot for the best results. Consistent control is possible from any rifle type, unless it's broken. Emphasis should be placed on the elements and factors of a steady position instead of ambiguous mind theatre. Neither the term "ride" or "drive" communicates what it is that the shooter needs to do to transfer the stability of the ground into the position. Useful communication stresses what will be accomplished when muscular relaxation, bone and artificial support, and natural point of aim are properly integrated.
Last edited:
The translation of "ride" or "drive" for me is what to do with the offhand. With a bolt rifle, I often let it "ride" at the buttstock, as the weapon seems a little more forgiving regarding hold. With a gas rifle, I get better results with the offhand up front "driving", as a consistently firm hold and recoil management seems more crucial to accuracy. There are certainly exceptions, but I've seen the concept work for shooters that seem to struggle with a gas rifle. YMMV
Agree, much more important with lighter or larger caliber rifles. There a good reason shooters use a sling.
I'm with Proneshooter. I think lock-time is the biggest reason for degraded accuracy. What a slow lock-time does is amplify the effects of a flinch. A flinch is not a reaction to the recoil as a rifle fires but rather a subconscious reaction to the accumulated knowledge of the result of all previous firings. You don't react to the recoil, you react before the recoil. A flinch happens as you are pulling the trigger and before the gun fires. Thus, a slow lock time amplifies the unwanted movement exerted on the rifle.
The most evident effects of a flinch are blinking of the eyes, jerking rather than pressing the trigger and the movement of the whole body into the gun. A ninety degree trigger press directs the force directly back rather than pushing or pulling the gun laterally. Follow through trains the body to maintain the same position throughout the shot and its aftermath. Also consider that a flinch is not only due to recoil but also noise and concussion. A common training method with a revolver is to leave a couple chambers in the cylinder empty. When the shooter drops the hammer on these empty chambers you will see his whole body move forward and push the gun down and to the left (right handed shooter). It's pretty dramatic.
As the hammer on a semi trundles along through it's slow arc there's plenty of time for us to screw up the shot.
The most evident effects of a flinch are blinking of the eyes, jerking rather than pressing the trigger and the movement of the whole body into the gun. A ninety degree trigger press directs the force directly back rather than pushing or pulling the gun laterally. Follow through trains the body to maintain the same position throughout the shot and its aftermath. Also consider that a flinch is not only due to recoil but also noise and concussion. A common training method with a revolver is to leave a couple chambers in the cylinder empty. When the shooter drops the hammer on these empty chambers you will see his whole body move forward and push the gun down and to the left (right handed shooter). It's pretty dramatic.
As the hammer on a semi trundles along through it's slow arc there's plenty of time for us to screw up the shot.
There are a multitude of reasons for not hitting where aimed, poor follow through being just one. And, while a faster lock time may serve to enhance the results possible for someone who does not follow through until recoil has subsided, a slower lock-time, as presented with some AR trigger groups, does not pose a handicap for a good shooter. A good shooter can get the desired result with a bolt gun or AR, regardless of fire control mechanism's speed.
Last edited:
Try placing the non firing hand on the fore-end of your bolt gun and see the results you will get. Grasp the fore-end with only enough pressure to control the rifle.
SS, I've been reading your posts for three years now and I have no doubts about your ability and/or knowledge. The ability to build a bone-to-bone-to-earth position and repeat it precisely is a skill that must take forever to learn. But I believe this thread is more directed towards the ability to shoot the smallest possible groups from a bench using a bipod and rear bag or from prone using the same equipment. The idea is to demonstrate the firearm's ability. Unfortunately the introduction of the shooter is often the limiting factor. Often we see a series of groups that seem to wander around the point of aim. I attribute this to an inability to get into the gun in a precise repetitive manner but the shooting position is extremely stable. I believe that flinch is what opens up many groups and the slow lock-time of a semi simply allows more time for movement. Consider how much harder it is to shoot a light rifle accurately on a repetitive basis. The moment of inertia for a light gun is simply lower, therefore it is simply easier to disturb it from it's NPA.
I can't really say, I was introduced to shooting at about the age of 8, and got my intro to semi's with the M-14 at Parris Island in 1966. Was already Smallbore Expert (lettered twice on my HS smallbore rifle team) when I joined, and we were all pretty much put through the mill by The Corps. With respect, each rifle, semi or not, is different; and to me the semi vs non is usually among the smaller differences.
The place where a faster lock time shows its usefulness is while shooting in standing position; yet, good shooters did well with their AR's in HP and LR even before introduction of the Geissele Automatic. No doubt though, the faster lock time can improve results. A few years ago, after installing a GA in my match conditioned Service Rifle, I set a record for the standing position in NRA HP at the Bluegrass Sportsman's Club. This was a feat I don't think would have happened using the Jewell trigger I had originally placed in the gun. But, back to this thread, the OP appears to want to know if the semi automatic is harder to shoot for accuracy than the bolt gun. I think it is actually easier to shoot than the bolt gun and have posted some of reasons why I find it easier to shoot.
Last edited:
I used to walk the border (7th Cav in 67) with a member of the German Border Guard who was an infantry soldier during WWII. This fellow was in his fifties and I was in my twenties and he could out distance me every time. He walked a nine mile stretch three times a week. I admired his H&K MP5 and we got to talking guns. He said that when they introduced the semi autos and MP (Machine Pistols) and went away from the Mauser K98 bolt action rifles, he knew they were going to lose the war because no one could shoot anymore. No one took the time to aim.
The following year the Army took away our M14s and gave us M16s. As we walked off the range another old sergeant from our Army turned to me and said –“this is a piece of shit we are going to lose this war. Turns out he was right.
I don’t believe a semi auto rifle need be a lot less accurate than a bolt action rifle. But usually military style semi autos are built with a lot of play to make them very reliable. That looseness does cause accuracy to suffer. I National Match grade semi can be a very accurate rifle. Buy my opinion is that it will not be as accurate as a well-built bolt action rifle. I think one of the reasons I am less exacting with a semi is that I do get a second or even third chance. With my bolt action hunting rifles I am going to make the first shot count.
Just one man's humble opinion based on my personal experience.
The following year the Army took away our M14s and gave us M16s. As we walked off the range another old sergeant from our Army turned to me and said –“this is a piece of shit we are going to lose this war. Turns out he was right.
I don’t believe a semi auto rifle need be a lot less accurate than a bolt action rifle. But usually military style semi autos are built with a lot of play to make them very reliable. That looseness does cause accuracy to suffer. I National Match grade semi can be a very accurate rifle. Buy my opinion is that it will not be as accurate as a well-built bolt action rifle. I think one of the reasons I am less exacting with a semi is that I do get a second or even third chance. With my bolt action hunting rifles I am going to make the first shot count.
Just one man's humble opinion based on my personal experience.
Exactly, most don't shoot highpower or stand and shoot for groups offhand. Shooting accurately is always about repetitive technique. The question was are semi's harder to shoot? I assume all other things being equal and the rifle shooting well not being over-gassed. Lock time is one difference, trigger quality could be another. For the average shooter? yes semi auto's can be harder to shoot. After you figure it out they can shoot very well. I have a few that can shoot 1/4MOA out to 300 off the bench IF I do my part.
This is me. I just stepped into my first bolt gun, a Savage Mark ll TR, yeah, it's a 22LR, but I can hit much tighter groups first day than with my AR's. It was so damn easy to be more consistent that maybe this will help me shot my AR's better, cause I can see where this will go otherwise, another bolt gun in a bigger caliber or I will drop to a match grade trigger for my AR and I'm trying to avoid giving up the reliability of a standard trigger. I have an ALG defense trigger in my 20" AR with JP 4.5lb springs and it breaks pretty well, well enough that groups are becoming more consistent, but nothing like the Mark 2's light trigger. I think the trigger plays the biggest part for me being consistent and I'm afraid to go too light with it.
The second principle of marksmanship is to pull the trigger without moving the rifle utilizing SMOOTH trigger control. I've never incountered a stock AR trigger that could not be pulled smoothly, unless it was broken. This statement serves my point on this thread that with all we know about accuracy today, we should know a good shooter will get the best result with any modern firearm, and an untrained or un-knowledgeable shooter will get less than the best result possible with what ever it is he's shooting, indepentent of format or position. Years ago, John Femester conclusivly proved in winning a few very prestigous 200 yard bench rest tournaments with an AR that the AR platform is second to nothing. I'd suggest reading his book "Black Majic".
Last edited:
My 16 Y/O Granddaughter is coming up to speed shooting my Stag 6 Super Varminter in our local Club FV250 F T/R category. Her take on the rifle is that it's her favorite, she "...know(s) I can hit what I'm aiming at" with it.
I am being very conservative about what I teach her regarding Marksmanship; I want her to find her own style and manner of marksmanship, and then we can build from there. So far she has grabbed the ball and is running fast and straight with it
She also shoots a Savage 10FCM Scout 7.62x39 with a conventional scope setup, and wrings it dry for its accuracy.
She sees the two as different rifles, and the manner of mechanical operation has not yet been a subject for discussion.
She manages, and that's that; both rifles' actions/triggers are completely untouched as received from their makers.
It's my view that the shooter manages the gun, as it is. They conform to it, and not vice-versa. She is still some ways this side of needing anything custom in order to advance beyond her present implements' ability to defeat a target.
Hard to shoot? I've never heard those words from her. It is what it is, and she takes it as it is.
Greg
I am being very conservative about what I teach her regarding Marksmanship; I want her to find her own style and manner of marksmanship, and then we can build from there. So far she has grabbed the ball and is running fast and straight with it
She also shoots a Savage 10FCM Scout 7.62x39 with a conventional scope setup, and wrings it dry for its accuracy.
She sees the two as different rifles, and the manner of mechanical operation has not yet been a subject for discussion.
She manages, and that's that; both rifles' actions/triggers are completely untouched as received from their makers.
It's my view that the shooter manages the gun, as it is. They conform to it, and not vice-versa. She is still some ways this side of needing anything custom in order to advance beyond her present implements' ability to defeat a target.
Hard to shoot? I've never heard those words from her. It is what it is, and she takes it as it is.
Greg
Last edited:
While this may be true, but the trend tends to be that shooters, who aren't the best-trained, tend to do better with bolt actions than semi-autos.
The untrained shooter does not know that he does not know. He does not know that he does not know how to shoot the firearm he believes he knows how to shoot. He perceives that executition of the firing tasks is all there is to know.
Last edited:
That's all good and well, but they will still get better results on paper with a bolt gun.
Never said it couldn't be pulled smoothly. This is just my observation for me, no one else. I've had to hear my former boss who was an Army Sniper constantly go on about bolt guns but was impressed with my AR's, coming from him that was a compliment. I'm prior Army as well, my rifle was a M16A1, A2's were still making their way around back then before I got out. Never had a problem qualifying with it. Some people will swear you need a match grade trigger to get those small groups, I like my standard triggers but do wonder how it would be to have the lighter trigger. Once again, just my personal observation for myself.
Nope. Nope. And Nope.
Clues found here:
Firearm cycling slow motion / ciclo das armas camera lenta - YouTube
Last edited:
Graham demonstrates that the action type is not a concern for an accuracy enthusiast who understands what's important to good shooting. What's important is controlling the rifle consistently while the bullet is still in it. I have earlier said I think the design of the AR makes it easier to control consistently.
I recall mid-range tournaments I used to enjoy each month one shooting season at Oakridge. These were prone 600 by 3's. When mixing it up between my 308 bolt gun and 223 Service Rifle, my scores with each averaged at 97 percent. This was not a surprise to me, because I understand how to build a proper position with each rifle, even though it was harder to make my position comfortable/consistent with my bolt gun. It was stocked with a standard HS Precision Marksman Stock, which simply did not fit me very well. As I said in my first post, I can snuggle up to my AR even easier than I can to my LR Prone Bolt Gun, which is adjustable for comfort.
The bottom line here is that the shooter should be more concerned about being able to establish a solid position with whatever rifle action type he has or is entertaining than the action type itself.
One more thing, it has been stated here that youngsters seem to do better with the AR than other types. The recent explosion of youngsters winning Distinguished Rifleman status suggests that the AR is indeed easier for them to shoot accurately; but, of course, that is a comparison between the AR and M1A.
I recall mid-range tournaments I used to enjoy each month one shooting season at Oakridge. These were prone 600 by 3's. When mixing it up between my 308 bolt gun and 223 Service Rifle, my scores with each averaged at 97 percent. This was not a surprise to me, because I understand how to build a proper position with each rifle, even though it was harder to make my position comfortable/consistent with my bolt gun. It was stocked with a standard HS Precision Marksman Stock, which simply did not fit me very well. As I said in my first post, I can snuggle up to my AR even easier than I can to my LR Prone Bolt Gun, which is adjustable for comfort.
The bottom line here is that the shooter should be more concerned about being able to establish a solid position with whatever rifle action type he has or is entertaining than the action type itself.
One more thing, it has been stated here that youngsters seem to do better with the AR than other types. The recent explosion of youngsters winning Distinguished Rifleman status suggests that the AR is indeed easier for them to shoot accurately; but, of course, that is a comparison between the AR and M1A.
Last edited:
Graham is demonstrating that action type is a concern because it affects one's ability to control the rifle. Graham is also implying that all ARs are not the same; that larger caliber ARs are more difficult to control consistently than the .223 variant, and that ARs have consistency issues that reach beyond establishing a stable position. Thus Graham is ignoring the marksmanship manual's introductory mantra about having to build a solid position and is instead responding to the stated issue in quotations regarding 'driving the gun', to conclude that semi-autos are indeed 'driven' differently than bolt guns.
Last edited:
RFA. RFA. And RFA.
The pistol stuff has no bearing on a precision gas gun.
So, the one little part about bolt bounce in an AR... what's the clue
besides precision ARs are/should be made to minimize that?
Nevermind, using that clip, at all, shows that you are clueless.
Last edited:
Kindly go pick an argument with someone willing to spoon-feed you while you insult them.
And on the issue of cluelessness:
RFA - Definition by AcronymFinder
Last edited:
Agree,
Light rifles and rifles of larger calibers recoil more, the muzzle comes up quicker. If the muzzle comes up while the bullet is still in the bore accuracy will suffer. That is one issue with ARs unless they are shooting highpower with a 28" long 1" dia barrel. Locktime on the AR can cause problems too for the average shooter. There was a similar thread not a month ago. Lowlight said it, the AR will magnify a shooters bad technique.
Well, Graham, it appears that your video made my point without you being knowledgeable about it. I actually thought you had learned something. At any rate, your video shows what's happening at the gun after the bullet has left the bore. While in the bore, an AR, in any caliber, needs to be controlled just as a bolt gun would need to be controlled, meaning proper application of the elements and factors of a steady position. I believe the AR's design (M16 A2/A3/A4) allows for more consistent control by its design than does the typical generic stocked bolt gun. That may be why we are seeing some of today's bolt action rifles, like the Tubb 2000, being made more characteristic of the AR's design.
Last edited:
Gee, just about every everything you've said here is an erroneous conclusion to cause and effect relationships that do not exist.
