...not unlike the RCMP lackeys examining the Rifle it would seem...Originally Posted by Adam134
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
...not unlike the RCMP lackeys examining the Rifle it would seem...
Hah ha ha, hah! This thread has been better than t.v! Their should be a "reality show made from the arrival of the t-81. Not sure what you could call it though.
Hey,
Its @canadiangunlover
As for all of you arguing about the rifle... I fixed the rear sight. It was off due to tampering by someone, I suspect the lab, but I managed to fix it. (It was mostly the front sight which was cranked all the way left iirc.
Also TI says the final guns will have a different rear sight. A better one. (Not that there is anything wrong with the existing one, but I won't argue with a slight upgrade)
Honestly, I'm not sure how caliber conducted their accuracy testings, but I am getting better groups than they are saying. It is a super fun gun, and everyone that has shot it so far will agree. The stock is a bit different then most would expect, the cutout for your cheek is far forward, but its how they designed it. Once you get used to it, it makes sense and works.
I have several videos ready, first will be posted tomorrow. I will share the link here
I said as much when it was first published. Calibre didn't say much about how the gun was sandbagger, the shooter's typical skill level, or the shooting conditions.
For all we know, it was a cold, very windy day with a shooter that shot unsupported prone without their prescription glasses. We simply don't know and the magazine didn't specify.
Keeping it real on the range since before there was a CGN.
I had faith that their testing was flawed. Excited to see your resultsAs for all of you arguing about the rifle... I fixed the rear sight. It was off due to tampering by someone, I suspect the lab, but I managed to fix it. (It was mostly the front sight which was cranked all the way left iirc.
Also TI says the final guns will have a different rear sight. A better one. (Not that there is anything wrong with the existing one, but I won't argue with a slight upgrade
Honestly, I'm not sure how caliber conducted their accuracy testings, but I am getting better groups than they are saying. It is a super fun gun, and everyone that has shot it so far will agree. The stock is a bit different then most would expect, the cutout for your cheek is far forward, but its how they designed it. Once you get used to it, it makes sense and works.
I have several videos ready, first will be posted tomorrow. I will share the link here
New article just out in The Firearm Blog " Any U.S. soldier who achieves 7 moa or better will achieve the highest grade of Expert"
I quess the type 81's must be coming with laser guided bullet trachectory blab blab blab As some are saying way better then 5 moa guns
To silence the TROLL's I've got a fixed and a folding on the way
Interesting.
Yes this gun is certainly better. Plus the final guns will have longer barrels too.
I did not film my accuracy testing but am now tempted to go back and film the rifle at 100, 200 and 300 to show CGN (Most of my filming was up close because the further ranges don't permit standing, and have baffles :/)
The rifles will be here soon enough folks lol
Less than an inch longer likely won't make much performance difference.
CQB, 3 Gun, ISSAC and Service Rifle Shooter.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ - 1* - SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM - HAN SHOT FIRST - YOUR FREEDOM IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY
Over an inch actually
Posting Permissions
