New Lipsey’s Ruger M77 Alaskan in 9.3x62 and 35 Whelen

[BigUglyMan]

Shooting low seems to be a common theme: ( shooting starts at the 8:20 mark)

I like Ron, and we've talked a bit on Facebook, but I've never been impressed with his technique for shooting from the bench. And the kid he was shooting with has even worse form off the bags. Forend off the front rest, butt off the rabbit-ear bag...that's #### bench form, especially for a reasonably well-mannered rifle and cartridge combination. I'm not saying that the rifle wasn't shooting low with those loads, but when your bench form is that bad, your results are nearly worthless. When neither of them could describe their sight picture, or whether they were using a six-o'clock hold or something else, I immediately knew that the video wasn't going to be very beneficial.

It's too bad, because for years we have trusted gunwriters with no truly effective way to gauge their qualification for the deference we all paid them, other than their skill with the English language. The video age especially since YouTube has come to the fore, for all its faults, has stripped away some of that cloak of anonymity. Now you have to wade through a mountain of obvious pretenders to find truly valuable information, and if you haven't got a solid amount of experience, sorting the wheat from the chaff can be nearly impossible.

 

[BigUglyMan]

If I was going to use the irons on that rifle I’d buy a partridge front insert and file it in with the load I wanted to use.

"Patridge", not "Partridge". Autocorrect screwed you.

But you're not wrong. A nice square blade in a nice square notch has served defensive pistol users exceptionally well over the years. What would make them less than ideal for a defensive (or any, for that matter) rifle?

 

[DGY]

I like Ron, and we've talked a bit on Facebook, but I've never been impressed with his technique for shooting from the bench. And the kid he was shooting with has even worse form off the bags. Forend off the front rest, butt off the rabbit-ear bag...that's #### bench form, especially for a reasonably well-mannered rifle and cartridge combination. I'm not saying that the rifle wasn't shooting low with those loads, but when your bench form is that bad, your results are nearly worthless. When neither of them could describe their sight picture, or whether they were using a six-o'clock hold or something else, I immediately knew that the video wasn't going to be very beneficial.

It's too bad, because for years we have trusted gunwriters with no truly effective way to gauge their qualification for the deference we all paid them, other than their skill with the English language. The video age especially since YouTube has come to the fore, for all its faults, has stripped away some of that cloak of anonymity. Now you have to wade through a mountain of obvious pretenders to find truly valuable information, and if you haven't got a solid amount of experience, sorting the wheat from the chaff can be nearly impossible.

I totally agree with what your seeing/saying, if Ron was the only one then I would for sure say well his form ain’t great and that’s maybe why, but so far I didn’t read or watch anyone that there rifle was actually hiring point of aim at 50yards where Ruger says it is where the sights were zeroed… they don’t say with what ammo. So that to me is junk they never shot the rifles for point of impact with the iron sights that’s it!

 

[9.3mauser]

When neither of them could describe their sight picture, or whether they were using a six-o'clock hold or something else, I immediately knew that the video wasn't going to be very beneficial.

I was curious about that as well. I suspect they may have been burying the bead at the bottom of the 'V', rather than having the top of the bead even with the top of the "ears" of the 'V'. It that's what they were doing, it's little wonder it was shooting low.

Express sights were designed for fast shooting at rock-throwing ranges; I'm not a fan of them for any sort of precision shooting.