BCL102 Range Review, SECOND RANGE TRIP POST 123!!!
- Thread starter Jay
- Start date
Calgary Shooting Centre has a sale on Gunfighter CH. I think I am just going to do the badger ord upgrade.
DaveMachine
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- That one place with a cowboy complex
https://i.imgur.com/WTUPBXf.jpg
5-round group with American Eagle 'M1A' 168gr OTM 7.62x51 @100yds. The picture is rotated 90deg so the group actually has more horizontal than vertical so I'm thinking I could do a bit better with something other than the stock trigger.
5-round group with American Eagle 'M1A' 168gr OTM 7.62x51 @100yds. The picture is rotated 90deg so the group actually has more horizontal than vertical so I'm thinking I could do a bit better with something other than the stock trigger.
Yes, as long as they use a readily available barrel extension barrels would be easy to make for these.
DiabeticKripple
CGN Regular
- Location
- Red Deer, Alberta
1.5 MOA is pretty good. a new trigger would get you 1 MOA or less potentially.
I just ordered myself a triggertech ar15 adjustable trigger.
I'm running a 2.5-10 x44 pst on my xcr at the moment. Works good on 2.5 both eyes open for close in, 10x great further out.
We aren't in disagreement on that. One other point of note though is that the MK II Mod 0 also recommended M118LR and M853 (168 Federal Gold) ammo in the manual back in 2000. The military lowered the load/velocity in 2003 of the M118LR ammo. So the SR 25 is good for the higher velocity/loaded M118LR.
Actually that's a pretty bad synopsis and led you to the wrong conclusion. The military lowered the M118LR load/velocity in 2003 due to the M14 having gas issues in the heat and breaking op rods. The SR 25 and M24 were fine. It wasn't and still isn't about the suitability for the AR 10 it was about the M14. A more detailed reference regarding the Navy Special Warfare Centre heading up the charge development mentions it has to run in the M14, SR 25 and Remington 700 even today. So again the limiting factor here is the M14. As I stated before the semi auto reloading voodoo is a throw back from the M14 issues not the AR 10/ SR 25. Most recently in Canadian firearms owners world, the Modern Hunter people have brought back this nonsense.
Well, that's true with any rifle including bolt actions. Most hunting ammo is actually mediocre accuracy in most bolt guns.
I've been using the 175 SMK round loaded slightly hotter than 175 Federal Gold aka M118LR for about 8 years now in my AR 10/ AR 308 rifles. So basically the pre 2003 M118LR round. It's why I've stated since the beginning that people aiming for 1 moa is a joke with these guns. They are capable of .5 to .75 moa without much effort. A good barrel, trigger and ammo. Also that they do in fact shoot the same ammo as a comparable bolt action with comparable barrels. This wasn't just based on theory it was also based on experience of shooting both.
I'm glad to see someone finally giving this round a try in the BCL 102. As an old German instructor I used to know would say "the proof is in the pudding". Let's just say the results don't surprise me.
Last edited:
" Also that they do in fact shoot the same ammo as a comparable bolt action with comparable barrels. This wasn't just based on theory it was also based on experience of shooting both. "
just trying to keep up with you Epoxy7, so in your opinion, what's lacking in everyone's test results. barrel? twist rate? ammo choice/load?
I have yet to see a easy .5 or .75 moa group yet. There are some decent groups don't get me wrong but nothing to brag about just yet.
Just curious as you seem to have lots of knowledge on the AR-10 game.
I have shot a couple JP rifles in 308 and the stupid things literally could group .75 with 90% of commercial ammo. Whys that?
just trying to keep up with you Epoxy7, so in your opinion, what's lacking in everyone's test results. barrel? twist rate? ammo choice/load?
I have yet to see a easy .5 or .75 moa group yet. There are some decent groups don't get me wrong but nothing to brag about just yet.
Just curious as you seem to have lots of knowledge on the AR-10 game.
I have shot a couple JP rifles in 308 and the stupid things literally could group .75 with 90% of commercial ammo. Whys that?
You stated earlier the A-10 platform wasn't meant to shoot surplus.Most all 7.62 surplus is likely sourced as at one time NATO accepted production.
Not suggesting you are, but let's not confuse this with newly produced stuff from Norinco or Barnel or the like.
I have read some anicdotal stuff on forums and in written print that surmises this same hypothesis, but haven't seen anything approaching verifiable proof that this is the case.
Do you have a reputable source for this claim?
My understanding of the changes to the M118LR was in search of making it more accurate, reducing flash signature, increasing consistency, reducing temp. sensitivity of the powder, allowing for pressure spiking due to shooting in a desert environment, etc. - things that are captured in the NSWC documentation - and things that equally affected the performance of all their systems.
I haven't seen anything of reputable source referencing back to singling out the M-14 as the reason for the changes to the ammo.
Further, it doesn't stand to reason for them to move backwards with ammo to suit a rifle brought out as a known stopgap.
Perhaps we'll have to agree to disagree.
It is my understanding the "New crop of Sniper Rifles" referred to in the article and the NSWC documentation isn't referencing the has-been M14/M21s brought out of mothballs for emergency use, they are referencing the AR-10 platform sniper rifles currently in service and being continually brought in.
In any event, the M118LR concept is essentially ancient history - they were playing catch up to advancements in civilian LR and Service Rifle shooting being made in NRA high power, and the M118 has more value to a collector than it does to a shooter.
I'm in the same boat. This new trigger should help a bit but having said that, after testing 4 more boxes of ammo they are all still in the same ball park.
I just find it rather odd that out of a whole wack of ammo tested the rifle doesn't 100% like anything LMAO minus the (federal gold match, which is useless to me hunting wise)
Im loving the range reports however!
Yea. If I am being honest, if I have to settle for 1.5 moa I am fine with that, but I will be putting I'm a lot more effort to make sure it. Ant do better before I give up. Jerry's results will likely fix our problem.
DiabeticKripple
CGN Regular
- Location
- Red Deer, Alberta
I think once we get some more handloads tuned for the gas system as well we will see better groups.
I am holding off buying anymore than the optic, grip, buttstock and trigger for mine till some testing is done and the results from Jerry's experiments are finished and the results known. Then we will have a better idea if other mods are warranted or needed. Sucks waiting till the second preorder to come in. I was on for a black one on the first preorder as there was no FDE left when I ordered, but ended up switching to FDE on the second order so have to wait... it is killin me... I wanna
not sure! I think as you mentioned you have one ordered for it?
I don't know enough about ARs and gas for them. I'm leaning towards sending mine over to Mystic perhaps to see if a after market barrel will fit. ( wouldn't hurt to have a 20-22" and maybe a tad lighter contour) Does anyone know what the folks in NZ are shooting to achieve this so called MOA with their version of the 102? Cause I have seen posts
with some damn good results just cant remember where.
yeah driller, 1.5 moa isn't bad, just I know we can all get better =D
