Should I be satisfied with 1 MOA in my new LMT 18" MWS?

[Scooter1942]

Couple of weeks ago I bought a new LMT LM8MWS with both the 16" CL and 18" SS 5R barrel. I installed the 18" barrel and did a brief break-in. It shot reasonably well with factory match ammo, but I knew there was room for improvement.

So, I bought an SSA-E trigger, Slash's buffer and spring and replaced the stock with an ACR. Very soft shooting, easy to get back on target, and fun to shoot. Right now, I'm using a Leupold Mk4 10x40 M3 mil-dot in a Badger Unimount. However, I kind of expected a little more accuracy out of this barrel...something in the 1/2 MOA range.

What I've been getting is consistent 5 shot groups in the .90-1.1" range with 168 gr. GMM. I've also tried 175 GMM and 168 OTM's. The 175's are horrible, but both 168 loads do ok. Is this all I should expect out of this rifle with factory ammo? I'm certain I could tighten it up a bit with hand loads, but for whatever reason I kind of thought this rifle would shoot a tad better than it does.

Does anyone get consistent 1/2 MOA results with MWS? Factory ammo or hand loads?

 

[ZombieMonkey]

1 MOA or a little better is about what I would expect out of that rifle. It may do better with handloads, it may not. The other thing to factor in is have you shot other large-frame AR's before? A lot of people take some time to get better shooting them. You can't expect to go from shooting an AR-15 well to expecting that to translate over well to the AR-10.

 

[rjacobs]

Mine does about 1 average with the chrome lined barrel. Occasionally when the stars align it will shoot 1/2-3/4(best group ever was a ~.4), but generally 1's. I have found mine likes 155's better than anything else. Doesnt matter what 155(I think I have shot 5 or so different 155's), it likes em. Like yours mine doesnt like 175's nearly as much.

 

[BCP]

That accuracy is in line with the components you are using. If you want tighter groups you need handloads, a higher magnification scope with a finer reticule, and a buttstock that is a bit easier to get a consistent cheekweld.

Also, more trigger time will make your groups get tighter too.

Contrary to what you'll read 1/2MOA is tough out of a bolt gun, nevermind a carbine. You just bought the thing, you plunk it down on a table with a box of ammo and pull off MOA groups...that is good shooting. Once you get more comfortable with it, figure out a handload, you will do better.

 

[Infringed711]

I've been averaging about 1moa with mine, it's probably capable of consistently shooting below .75 moa and I'm just the limiting factor

 

[ntm]

Couple of weeks ago I bought a new LMT LM8MWS with both the 16" CL and 18" SS 5R barrel. I installed the 18" barrel and did a brief break-in. It shot reasonably well with factory match ammo, but I knew there was room for improvement.

So, I bought an SSA-E trigger, Slash's buffer and spring and replaced the stock with an ACR. Very soft shooting, easy to get back on target, and fun to shoot. Right now, I'm using a Leupold Mk4 10x40 M3 mil-dot in a Badger Unimount. However, I kind of expected a little more accuracy out of this barrel...something in the 1/2 MOA range.

What I've been getting is consistent 5 shot groups in the .90-1.1" range with 168 gr. GMM. I've also tried 175 GMM and 168 OTM's. The 175's are horrible, but both 168 loads do ok. Is this all I should expect out of this rifle with factory ammo? I'm certain I could tighten it up a bit with hand loads, but for whatever reason I kind of thought this rifle would shoot a tad better than it does.

Does anyone get consistent 1/2 MOA results with MWS? Factory ammo or hand loads?

My 18" ss shoots in the .6 to .7 range with handloads, consistently. It'll spit out the odd sub half moa group once in a while too.
Pretty much anything using a sierra projectile sucked in all three of my mws barrels.
My 18" ss only likes hornady 178 amax in a lapua case, 2.815 oal, cci br2 primers and 42.6 grains of varget.
My 20" ss only likes 168 amax, strange that 2" of barrel length does that. Using different charge weights didn't matter, the 18" wants 178 and the 20" wants 168. There was a dramatic difference in accuracy when using the projectile they prefer.

 

[997/2man]

FGMM 168s gave me 1"-1.25". Using a 10x scope also. Stock trigger.

 

[shurt]

My hand load 170's out of mine but with a competition trigger and an 8x scope gets me right at 1 moa. I've always like the idea of going out three different days and trying to shoot groups because so many things can affect your day.

 

[alpine44]

That accuracy is in line with the components you are using. If you want tighter groups you need handloads, a higher magnification scope with a finer reticule, and a buttstock that is a bit easier to get a consistent cheekweld.

Also, more trigger time will make your groups get tighter too.

Contrary to what you'll read 1/2MOA is tough out of a bolt gun, nevermind a carbine. You just bought the thing, you plunk it down on a table with a box of ammo and pull off MOA groups...that is good shooting. Once you get more comfortable with it, figure out a handload, you will do better.

^^^^This

and all of my LMT barrels for the MRP (AR15 size) got better with age. Just keep shooting. Things will get better one way or the other.

 

[Tangodown911]

Is the barrel fouling...how about copper? Use some JB or KG2 to polish it up. It's likely it will tighten slightly.

I friend's MWS was same way it liked 150 SST .6" groups. But it beat the hell out of brass.

 

[37841anarchy]

How does she shoot with the 16" barrel? Have you tried it yet?

 

[elfster1234]

.9 to 1moa is about spot on... to get any better you will need to reload, but don't expect a huge jump in accuracy... I would say any .308 AR will run in the .75 to 1.25 ON AVERAGE.... you're kidding yourself if you think you will pump out a .5moa group every time you pull the trigger. 308 AR's are typically 1moa rifles regardless of manufacture... sub moa results ON AVERAGE require reloading.

Couple of weeks ago I bought a new LMT LM8MWS with both the 16" CL and 18" SS 5R barrel. I installed the 18" barrel and did a brief break-in. It shot reasonably well with factory match ammo, but I knew there was room for improvement.

So, I bought an SSA-E trigger, Slash's buffer and spring and replaced the stock with an ACR. Very soft shooting, easy to get back on target, and fun to shoot. Right now, I'm using a Leupold Mk4 10x40 M3 mil-dot in a Badger Unimount. However, I kind of expected a little more accuracy out of this barrel...something in the 1/2 MOA range.

What I've been getting is consistent 5 shot groups in the .90-1.1" range with 168 gr. GMM. I've also tried 175 GMM and 168 OTM's. The 175's are horrible, but both 168 loads do ok. Is this all I should expect out of this rifle with factory ammo? I'm certain I could tighten it up a bit with hand loads, but for whatever reason I kind of thought this rifle would shoot a tad better than it does.

Does anyone get consistent 1/2 MOA results with MWS? Factory ammo or hand loads?

 

[Scooter1942]

Nope. Don't plan to either.

How does she shoot with the 16" barrel? Have you tried it yet?

 

[Tangodown911]

.9 to 1moa is about spot on... to get any better you will need to reload, but don't expect a huge jump in accuracy... I would say any .308 AR will run in the .75 to 1.25 ON AVERAGE.... you're kidding yourself if you think you will pump out a .5moa group every time you pull the trigger. 308 AR's are typically 1moa rifles regardless of manufacture... sub moa results ON AVERAGE require reloading.

I agree. Id say very few would shoot .5".

 

[GUNNER10]

Two things.

One. different rifles like different ammo. Just have to find a sweet spot.

Two. People are generally full of shit when talking about semi auto accuracy. Expect .75 to an 1 groups for a standard 308 AR with ss barrel and factory ammo.

Short of a bull barrel with custom chamber and handloads your not going constantly do better than .75 CONSISTENTLY.

My 16" inch cl mws is about a 1 inch gun with 178 amax's. Its money out to 800. If i need any more accuracy or range then its time to time pull out the 300wm boltgun.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

 

[wxl]

Nope. Don't plan to either.

Sounds like you have a gun ready for the classifieds.

 

[cal50]

Nice rifle and in the ball park accuracy for what it is.
With some handloading you will likely shrink the groups.
1/2 MOA or less is a tough standard of equipment & shooter and something to shoot for (pun intended).

 

[samnev]

1" 5 shoot groups @ 100 yards is all I can get out of my 16" CL barreled MWS with a Geissele SSA-E trigger and that's with hand loads. As elfster said that's about what I get with my other 308 platforms. Only my POF P-308 and HK MR 762 shoot slightly better groups.

 

[OldGuardShooter]

I don't think anyone covered this but have you made sure when you switched out the barrels that everything was torqued to exact specs as per LMT . I have a LMT MWS 16 inch CL and several of my friends have one also if they don't torque it right switching barrels it can open up big time on groups.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

What is a half inch group compared to a one inch group? It's an indication that the multitude of errors which caused the group, instead of all bullets going to point of aim, was more miniscule than the larger group. Why more minuscule? Who knows for sure; but, the OP's observation that 175 GMM shot horribly suggests the OP could not shoot that high recoiling round as consistently as a round with less recoil. It also suggests working on building a more muscularly relaxed position is necessary for better results with any round.

Edit: but, the OP's observation that 175 GMM shot horrible suggests the OP could not shoot that higher recoiling round...

 

[RTH1800]

Sterling,

Surprised you did not go on a diatribe about proper use of the sling..

Guy goes from decent with 168's to "horrible" with 175's and you blame recoil! Amazing, simply amazing. I doubt the difference in recoil could be noticed. Even if it were noticeable, you do not go from average of 1 MOA to "horrible".

I have watched you post for years. For you every thread seems to be a reason to promote position, iron sights and proper sling use. I suppose you do the same thing on the wild game cooking threads but I do not read them. Every question is custom built for your stock answer...

Do barrel harmonics, out of spec chambers or twist rates ever make your radar screen? Loose barrel nuts?

Oh, hell, my sling keeper is loose again..

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Sterling,

Surprised you did not go on a diatribe about proper use of the sling..

Guy goes from decent with 168's to "horrible" with 175's and you blame recoil! Amazing, simply amazing. I doubt the difference in recoil could be noticed. Even if it were noticeable, you do not go from average of 1 MOA to "horrible".

I have watched you post for years. For you every thread seems to be a reason to promote position, iron sights and proper sling use. I suppose you do the same thing on the wild game cooking threads but I do not read them. Every question is custom built for your stock answer...

Do barrel harmonics, out of spec chambers or twist rates ever make your radar screen? Loose barrel nuts?

Oh, hell, my sling keeper is loose again..

The 175 GMM produces more recoil than the 168 GMM. Since this heavier recoil is harder to control consistently from shot to shot, resulting in unpredictable recoil resistance, it promotes angular errors which increase with distance. The OP's own comparative analysis revealed this kind of error, which suggests a poor position. BTW, your post suggests you are ignorant of the effect of angular error; and therefore, perhaps you are too inexperienced with the topic of shooter/target analysis to offer any help to the OP; but, that's O.K. it's entertaining to read from folks who do not know how to do it tell others who do not know how to do it how to do it.

Also, although there may be a multitude of reasons for poor shooting, since all errors originate from inconsistency the shooter does not need to discern the cause of error, he only needs to concentrate on what needs to be accomplished, i.e. sight alignment and trigger control. This may be what you alluded to as being a stock answer. Sorry not to bring any revelations that fire your imagination; but, unless the rifle is broken or ammunition is defective, neither here is suspect, it is shooter inconsistency which is the cause of error; and, this, as I said, can be addressed, even if the shooter can not discern the cause of the problem, just by focusing on the fundamentals.

 

[RTH1800]

Amazing, simply amazing.....

 

[Graham]

Should I be satisfied with 1 MOA in my new LMT 18" MWS?

In a .308 gas gun one can't tell the difference in recoil between 168 and 175 FGMM.... But for sure the 175s are not a 'high recoiling round'.

 

[BangBangBlatBlat]

In a .308 gas gun one can't tell the difference in recoil between 168 and 175 FGMM.... But for sure the 175s are not a 'high recoiling round'.

I can tell the difference between a 168 load and a 175 load in my semi-autos.

175s aren't hard, but I would be skeptical of shooting 1 MOA groups with 168s, and then having double or triple the group size to 175s.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

 

[Sterling Shooter]

In a .308 gas gun one can't tell the difference in recoil between 168 and 175 FGMM.... But for sure the 175s are not a 'high recoiling round'.

I can discern it, especially from shooting a string of slow fire shots from prone. But the heavy recoil I'm talking about is not that felt after the bullet has left the barrel but while the bullet is in the barrel. It promotes movement of the rifle from the time the trigger is pulled to the time the bullet leaves the bore. When this movement is not controlled, as from a poor position, the angle created between line of bore at rest and line of bore at bullet exit will be inconsistent; and thus, the resulting angular error will produce poor results, very poor results.

 

[Graham]

Should I be satisfied with 1 MOA in my new LMT 18" MWS?

I can tell the difference between a 168 load and a 175 load in my semi-autos.

Seven whole grains of difference in .30 cal bullet weight .... And with a moving bolt that weighs over a pound in a rifle that weighs... Oh, nevermind:

If you guys can tell the difference in the amount of recoil between those two identical velocity rounds, after the trigger has been pulled, while the bullet is in the bore, but only until it exits, then I have no choice but to concede that you are both better at all this stuff than I am.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Seven whole grains of difference in .30 cal bullet weight .... And with a moving bolt that weighs over a pound in a rifle that weighs... Oh, nevermind:

If you guys can tell the difference in the amount of recoil between those two identical velocity rounds, after the trigger has been pulled, while the bullet is in the bore, but only until it exits, then I have no choice but to concede that you are both better at all this stuff than I am.

The heavy recoil described while bullet is in the bore is not the felt recoil after the bullet is released from the bore. I don't need to feel it to know its effect when control is not mustered from shot to shot.

 

[Graham]

Should I be satisfied with 1 MOA in my new LMT 18" MWS?

I don't need to discern it by feel to know its effect when control is not mustered from shot to shot.

Just to be clear: Are you backing-off from your original position that you can actually feel the difference in the recoil; or are you now narrowing the meaning of 'discern' to mean only that you can tell the use of heavier bullets by where they print on paper?

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Just to be clear: Are you backing-off from your original position that you can actually feel the difference in the recoil; or are you narrowing the meaning of 'discern' to mean only that you can tell the use of heavier bullets by where they print on paper?

I can feel the difference in felt recoil. It is not hard to discern (forgive the pun). BTW, in my original post I used the phrase high recoiling not to imply a hard kick but instead a greater amount of angular movement producing error increasing with distance when not controlled. I may look to you to find a better expression, you being the word smith that you are. Of course, a rifle which produces heavy felt recoil may pull a shooter out of position and if not rebuilt consistently from shot to shot can lead to all sorts of error too; but, this is not what I was addressing. Retrospectively my initial post should have used the phrase higher recoiling.

 

[BangBangBlatBlat]

Seven whole grains of difference in .30 cal bullet weight .... And with a moving bolt that weighs over a pound in a rifle that weighs... Oh, nevermind:

If you guys can tell the difference in the amount of recoil between those two identical velocity rounds, after the trigger has been pulled, while the bullet is in the bore, but only until it exits, then I have no choice but to concede that you are both better at all this stuff than I am.

Look. I get that you're skeptical.

I can tell the difference between two loads based on recoil. I've actually stopped shooting ammo because I didn't like the way the gun recoiled; the ammo was too hot for what I considered acceptable in an M14.

The difference at the muzzle between a 168 and 175 energy-wise is around 100 pounds. It's something like a 4% difference; not a lot. I don't know how this reduces down for the recoil impulse; I doubt it's linear, but for arguments sake lets say it is.

Now consider how good your body is at detecting things. If you were doing Bench at a gym, and I increased your weight by 4%, you would definitely be able to tell the difference.

Maybe that isnt a convincing or well crafted argument.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

 

[wxl]

Then if reducing the powder charge on the 175 enough to reduce 50 fps will give about the energy of the 168 and the OP should get same accuracy with the 175 (maybe better since it has higher BC). And another 50 fps off the 175 will let the OP get tighter group than the 168 or no worst as all other factors are the same?

 

[BCP]

It's not recoil his rifle just didn't like 175 FGMM. He just needs to start handloading. I can think up probably 5-6 recipes offhand that would probably shoot well in his rifle with a 175smk.

Also, a gas gun that consistently shoots 1MOA groups over and over is not a bad thing at all. Those are the rifles to hang on to.

 

[supercorndogs]

the only ar 15 i have had consistently stay under 1 moa was a rra predator pursuit 223 wylde. they have a .75 moa guarantee or their ar 15s at the time. i am not sure about their ar 10 though.

 

[ZombieMonkey]

There is noway, nohow that you can honestly feel the difference between the two FGMM loadings. NONE. Anything you think you "feel" is all in your head. One round vs another comparable loading in the same caliber is not going to reveal flaws in an individuals positioning. Sorry, but you need to stop passing around that pipe.

 

[cal50]

Some rifles have a bullet / powder preference.

I had an HK91 that shot 147 ball ammo into nice 1 1/2" circles all day long. That same rifle hated 155 Palma's, 168's , 175's and about all other "match" loadings. it performed best with NATO ball ammo. My varmint rifles definitely show a preference for certain propellants and bullet combinations. One rifle fires flat base bullets best while others group like a shotgun and like boat tail bullets best. Firing for accuracy and being able to accurately "call" your shots you can quickly separate operator error ( calling a bad shot ) vs something not grouping because the rifle does not like what you are feeding it.

As to the recoil difference in ammo of different weight the peak recoil difference may be minimal but the recoil impulse can be noticeable difference between loads.
Faster propellants have a sharper recoil impulse while some long range heavy bullet loads have slower powder that is less sharper in recoil and more of a dwell when fired.

If the gun is mechanically sound and the shots fired were all called "good" its most likely the rifle did not like the powder / bullet combination.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

There is noway, nohow that you can honestly feel the difference between the two FGMM loadings. NONE. Anything you think you "feel" is all in your head. One round vs another comparable loading in the same caliber is not going to reveal flaws in an individuals positioning. Sorry, but you need to stop passing around that pipe.

It's easy to feel it; but, that's not the point. The point is: heavier recoil makes the rifle more difficult to control, that's to say, recoil resistance becomes unpredictable. Unpredictable recoil resistance, this is while the bullet is in the barrel, creates dissimilar shot to shot angularity between line of bore at rest and line of bore at bullet exit. While this dissimilarity seems miniscule, being angular, the effect of inconsistency increases with distance. This is why the OP was going from good to horrible as he put it.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

There is noway, nohow that you can honestly feel the difference between the two FGMM loadings. NONE. Anything you think you "feel" is all in your head. One round vs another comparable loading in the same caliber is not going to reveal flaws in an individuals positioning. Sorry, but you need to stop passing around that pipe.

It's easy to feel it; but, that's not the point. The point is: heavier recoil makes the rifle more difficult to control, that's to say, recoil resistance becomes unpredictable. Unpredictable recoil resistance, this is while the bullet is in the barrel, creates dissimilar shot to shot angularity between line of bore at rest and line of bore at bullet exit. While this dissimilarity seems miniscule, being angular, the effect of inconsistency increases with distance. This is why the OP was going from good to horrible as he put it. He simply did not build a steady position. Shooting the 175's revealed it.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

It's not recoil his rifle just didn't like 175 FGMM. He just needs to start handloading. I can think up probably 5-6 recipes offhand that would probably shoot well in his rifle with a 175smk.

Also, a gas gun that consistently shoots 1MOA groups over and over is not a bad thing at all. Those are the rifles to hang on to.

You cannot say it is not recoil, the OP's own observation leads to that being the cause of his horrible result as he put it. Think about it. He is shooting ammunition that is not defective from a rifle that is clearly not broken. This indicates shooter inconsistency at the gun, or a problem building a consistent position, which was revealed when shooting the heavier recoiling round.

Now, we also know that the OP is a novice. He does not know much about anything important to good shooting. Evidence of this is in his emphasis on what he was shooting with instead of what his relationship was between gun and ground, or marksmanship, as well as his waste of 175 GMM, which was designed for M14 use in NRA LR Service Rifle Competition as an alternative to M118NM. There's barely enough velocity from a 22 inch barrel to get the 175 grain bullet to 1000 yards much less from the OP's barrel.

My own experience with M118NM, M118LR, M118SB, M852, 168 GMM, and 175 GMM at the 600 yard line suggests accuracy with any is not an issue, with one exception. The M118SB seems not on par with the others. Also, with no discernable advantage shooting rounds loaded with the 175 grain bullet at 600 except perhaps in gusting wind conditions, I have preferred to shoot the 168 grain bullet in a standard loading, although I still occasionally pull down my M118SB for 168's. The recoil is less and this helps with prolonged strings of fire at the 600 yard line shooting in match conditions.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Then if reducing the powder charge on the 175 enough to reduce 50 fps will give about the energy of the 168 and the OP should get same accuracy with the 175 (maybe better since it has higher BC). And another 50 fps off the 175 will let the OP get tighter group than the 168 or no worst as all other factors are the same?

You are not serious, right? The whole point of the 175 GMM is NRA LR Service Rifle Competition, getting a round nose-on to 1000 yards. That means a loading which produces enough velocity to keep the bullet supersonic or thereabouts to target distance. Loading down that round has no point.

 

[Graham]

Should I be satisfied with 1 MOA in my new LMT 18" MWS?

You are not serious, right? The whole point of the 175 GMM is NRA LR Service Rifle Competition, getting a round nose-on to 1000 yards. That means a loading which produces enough velocity to keep the bullet supersonic or thereabouts to target distance. Loading down that round has no point.

If you load that round down by 50fps the velocity loss alone will have no meaningful difference at 1000 yards.

Besides, you can't argue that it's all about the shooter, but then say that a 50fps difference matters. I get 50fps spreads over the chrono with FGMM all the time.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Some rifles have a bullet / powder preference.

I had an HK91 that shot 147 ball ammo into nice 1 1/2" circles all day long. That same rifle hated 155 Palma's, 168's , 175's and about all other "match" loadings. it performed best with NATO ball ammo. My varmint rifles definitely show a preference for certain propellants and bullet combinations. One rifle fires flat base bullets best while others group like a shotgun and like boat tail bullets best. Firing for accuracy and being able to accurately "call" your shots you can quickly separate operator error ( calling a bad shot ) vs something not grouping because the rifle does not like what you are feeding it.

As to the recoil difference in ammo of different weight the peak recoil difference may be minimal but the recoil impulse can be noticeable difference between loads.
Faster propellants have a sharper recoil impulse while some long range heavy bullet loads have slower powder that is less sharper in recoil and more of a dwell when fired.

If the gun is mechanically sound and the shots fired were all called "good" its most likely the rifle did not like the powder / bullet combination.

I doubt the OP can call his shots. I also doubt the OP knows how to build a good position. Now, what do you think would yield the poorest outcome, a shooter with a poor position or ammunition that you say the gun did not like? The answer is obvious, the shooter's relationship between gun and ground will likely be less consistent from shot to shot than ammunition unless the ammunition is defective.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

If you load that round down by 50fps the velocity loss alone will have no meaningful difference at 1000 yards.

Besides, you can't argue that it's all about the shooter, but then say that a 50fps difference matters. I get 50fps spreads over the chrono with FGMM all the time.

Really, you get 50 fps spreads all the time? You must have some bad ammunition. That sort of spread would make it impossible to get a starting zero on an LR target. The stock 175 GMM is loaded to a velocity which will get a bullet nose-on to LR, from a 22 inch barrel, period. Loading it down 50 fps defeats the rounds purpose, making the loading more marginal in some atmospheres. My experience with it shows a very low ES and SD, indicating I can hold elevation with it at LR, which effectively makes the target bigger, reducing the consequence of wind error.

 

[Graham]

Should I be satisfied with 1 MOA in my new LMT 18" MWS?

Really, you get 50 fps spreads all the time? You must have some bad ammunition. That sort of spread would make it impossible to get a starting zero on an LR target. The stock 175 GMM is loaded to a velocity to get a bullet nose-on to LR, period. My experience with it shows a very low ES and SD, indicating I can hold elevation with it at LR, which effectively makes the target bigger, reducing the consequence of wind error.

I have indeed been disappointed with factory match ammo lately, but it does not make it "impossible" to get a zero.

Depending on conditions and target size, predictable performance at 1000 yards with a .308 is not an easy task without handloading anyway.

...That is, assuming "nose-on" is the goal and handloading is not the topic.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

I have indeed been disappointed with factory match ammo lately, but it does not make it "impossible" to get a zero.

Depending on conditions and target size, predictable performance at 1000 yards with a .308 is not an easy task without handloading anyway.

...That is, assuming "nose-on" is the goal and handloading is not the topic.

Graham,

Take an M14 to the 1000 yard line with as issued irons and then get back here with your results with ammunition that has a 50 fps spread. It's insanely difficult just to get a consistent sight picture from shot to shot to have confidence in starting zero or zero used. Ammunition with a 50 fps spread complicates things especially when the shooter and ammunition error stacks. The bottom line is ammunition with a 50 fps spread is unacceptable for any competitive LR shooter-match, any/any, Service Rifle, or F Class. A low ES and SD makes the target bigger.

Hand loading is no doubt a good idea if it produces better performance than factory match. Interestingly, I need to really massage my 308 hand loads to match factory GMM.

 

[Graham]

Should I be satisfied with 1 MOA in my new LMT 18" MWS?

Graham,

Take an M14 to the 1000 yard line with as issued irons and then get back here with your results with ammunition that has a 50 fps spread. It's insanely difficult just to get a consistent sight picture from shot to shot to have confidence in starting zero or zero used. Ammunition with a 50 fps spread complicates things especially when the shooter and ammunition error stacks. The bottom line is ammunition with a 50 fps spread is unacceptable for any competitive LR shooter-match, any/any, Service Rifle, or F Class. A low ES and SD makes the target bigger.

Sterling,

I understand what you are saying, and I don't disagree.

But I am not limiting my comments or my analysis to shooting a particular rifle in a particular way with a particular type of sight on a particular sport-shooting course of fire in a particular shooting discipline.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Sterling,

I understand what you are saying, and I don't disagree.

But I am not limiting my comments or my analysis to shooting a particular rifle in a particular way with a particular type of sight on a particular sport-shooting course of fire in a particular shooting discipline.

Seems the ideal for any is the same, a starting no wind zero setting where the line of sight and bullet path intersect and the resulting value in any form of measurement is zero.

 

[wxl]

Then if reducing the powder charge on the 175 enough to reduce 50 fps will give about the energy of the 168 and the OP should get same accuracy with the 175 (maybe better since it has higher BC). And another 50 fps off the 175 will let the OP get tighter group than the 168 or no worst as all other factors are the same?

You are not serious, right? The whole point of the 175 GMM is NRA LR Service Rifle Competition, getting a round nose-on to 1000 yards. That means a loading which produces enough velocity to keep the bullet supersonic or thereabouts to target distance. Loading down that round has no point.

Of course not. I know the ballistic difference of the two at 1000 yards and the 168 goes subsonic at ~900 yards. I was referencing your interpretation of why the OP might or was having much bigger groups at shorter range with the 175s versus 168s. If it was true then similar energy (by lowering 175 velocity just 50 fps) would have negated the "175 recoil issue".

I was having a bit of trouble accepting your hypothesis if negating the recoil effect did not correct the OP's grouping issue at short range. But I confess to not being a master competition shooter or even a dedicated paper shooter. I just shoot because I enjoy it and mostly for hunting and some times for my load developments. I load and shoot with my rifles from 22 Hornet, 223, 243, 6.8 SPC, 270, 7-08, 7 RemMag, 284 Win, 300WinMag, 300WSM, 375 H&H, 308, 416 Rigby (might have forgot some) and my shotguns and couple dozen handguns.

I do not have the discipline to shoot paper competition and certainly not the understanding. I enjoy reading on many firearm forums for the insight and experience of novices to experts and learn from all levels and apply what I think will help my situation and needs. But I have been shooting for only 50+ years and am still learning. I do not think I am dumb so I can understand, evaluate and try to implement. I am a retired Chemical Engineer. A ChemE is a Master Engineer as we deal in math, chemistry, electrical/mechanical/civil/structural/hydraulic issues. Been stationed worldwide and domestic, responsible for solving issues with process plants 24/7 making decisions on the spot, design of new plants and expansions 500 million to 1 billion dollars, construction and commissioning. Not dumb but maybe alzheimer onset.

Apologies for my long introduction, so to summarize for your quoted question, "No".

 

[Jcub]

Just buy a KAC, everything else is shit.

 

[BCP]

You cannot say it is not recoil

And you can't say it's not his barrel liking that 168 load more than the 175 one either. Sometimes barrels are picky. Or maybe he only fired a couple 5 round groups of FGMM 175 and flubbed up on both of them so he gave up. Sometimes people buy these big-name rifle and then get mad when it's not an instant x-ring getter. Who knows.