APC223-SA Final specifications - place your order now.

DILLIGAF said:
Sent an email to Trigger Tech and they didnt even bother to email me back... :-(
Click to expand...

That's lame, but I'm assuming the manufacturers are wondering about liability of putting their parts into a firearm it wasn't designed (or probably tested) for? Wish I had a few kickin around to try out, but don't have the $$ to start buying trigger groups that may or may not work.
 
Any possibility for replacement non-ambi fire selector/safety switch? Not a big deal, just nice to have as stock one keeps digging into my trigger finger.
 
Picatinny said:
Have there been any range reports, as I cannot find any with the search feature?
1:9 vs 1:7 etc.
Click to expand...
I only have 1:9 version. Here are some of my results at 100 meters.

This is with Nosler SSA 5.56 55gr:
8qdUQvQ.jpg


On the next target first 2 rows are Hornady Practice .223 55gr and the last row is Hornady TAP .223 55gr.
Didn't measure precisely that time, but you can estimate the group size from the grid - 1 square is 1 inch.
g47hSCm.jpg


I am definitely not a trigger control expert, so your results might be better.

I can not recommend Hornady Superformance 5.56 55gr - my second round went overpressure and popped out it's primer which resulted in quite interesting failure to fire and then failure to extract the third round up to being unable to open the bolt by hand. It may be the coincidence of 3 factors: a bit tighter chamber (5.56 CIP? How different it is from 5.56 NATO actually?), a bit higher pressure round trying to fit chamber in a tighter way (the bullet seems to have a bit different curvature with straighter sides), a quite hot day (even though I was in the shadow when shooting).
 
Last edited:
I have tried searching for info on difference of 5.56 C.I.P. and 5.56 NATO chambers. I can not find any specification with 5.56 in the name on C.I.P. website. There is .223 Rem. indeed. Wikipedia says that "The C.I.P. rulings for the C.I.P. civilian .223 Remington chambering are much closer to the military 5.56×45mm NATO chambering.", which, I suppose, still means, that C.I.P. .223 Rem. is a bit tighter, than 5.56 NATO.
 
So far I've only tried 3 cheapie ammo from mine, I shoot rapid positional prone, not off the bench with a sled so the actual absolute group size is irrelevant. But the relative differences between loads is what's interesting to me.

  • Zombie max - prone on rough grass rapid (5 shots in 10 ~ 15 seconds) I got slightly under 2 MOA, which means if you shoot from benched sled and cool barrel off between shots you can shave at least 0.5 MOA off.

  • Norc yellow box - Add 1 MOA to Z-max, pretty much expected for cheap Chinese bulk ammo.

  • MFS 62gr SP steel case - Absolutely junk in terms of accuracy, add 2 to 3 additional MOA to Z-max.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom