After reading your post I believe we agree, just different sense of what accuracy means. Maybe this is the issue most have when talking about this. Accuracy to most (most I know anyways) is groups off a bench (measurable). And accuracy to some (like yourself) is hitting targets when aiming at them offhand or at speed. Your type of accuracy I would agree is more beneficial to most people I know using AR’s as it would be in competitions like 3gun.
Removing play between lower/upper
- Thread starter welder179
- Start date
After reading your post I believe we agree, just different sense of what accuracy means. Maybe this is the issue most have when talking about this. Accuracy to most (most I know anyways) is groups off a bench (measurable). And accuracy to some (like yourself) is hitting targets when aiming at them offhand or at speed. Your type of accuracy I would agree is more beneficial to most people I know using AR’s as it would be in competitions like 3gun.
Precision and accuracy are often confused. Accuracy refers to the closeness of a measured value to a standard or known value. ... Precision refers to the closeness of two or more measurements to each other.
In other words, hitting what you are aiming at is accuracy. Keeping your groups tight is precision.
I had to look that up, as I’m unfamiliar with those words and definitions being separate. Apparently always tried to be accurate (hitting where I aim) while looking for precision (tight groups), good to know.
r34skyline
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
What you are suggesting is a very poor shooting form prone or sitting so slop or not the bad form will also result in poor groups regardless. But even if you magically stabilized yourself and the gun with said form, no, because all the working parts that matter are attached to your upper so the bullet would have exited the barrel before anything starts moving.
As for the guy with the magic cheekweld problem. Sounds like you either have a crap optic on it or you don't know what you are doing.
To op, if you find it annoying and want to waste your time on an accuwedge go ahead? But it's a waste of time, and eventually that rubber does degrade and can compromise on your triggers functionality...
To anyone claiming any accuracy gains or even speed gains. Feel free to post quantifiable sources proving it.
What? Do you wear them so the rattling between the parts isn't as noticeable? Winky face
Even the military supply Accuwedges for the C7s. It was part of one rebuild sequence. I remember the one I saw was black, and that caught my eye because all the others I'd seen or owned were red.
Ah you mean the ones that mysteriously disappear in wainwright or somewhere on a field ex? I have yet to see one in any of the c7s or c8s that I have come across along with the amazing otis pistol grip cleaning kit(they definitely exist, just not in the guns that are used).
Last edited:
Is one mm of wiggle between the upper/lower going to translate into a massive misalignment of your eye with the scope?
Your eye is looking through the optic which is hopefully securely connected to your upper which is hopefully securely connected to your barrel, what you see in the scope is what your barrel is pointing at. The barrel doesn't shoot to where your cheek is aiming.
Proper shooting techniques will make any wiggle irrelevant since your rifle should be loaded the same every time meaning that your eye will also be in the same position behind the scope every time if you're shooting for accuracy, and if you're standing shooting freehand then nothing really matters since you're pretty much just trying to time the trigger pull to when the target passes through the crosshairs or dot.
People are (and have been for a long time) making way too big of a deal out of something that is insignificant to your ability to hit targets you point your rifle at.
If it makes people feel better they can blame their misses on the wiggle but in reality if you miss what you're aiming at it's either you or your choice of ammo is not friendly with your barrel which happens to be your fault as well.
easyrider604
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Greater Vancouver, BC
Wow...am I glad my cheap SW MP15 and Armalite have perfect upper to lower fits. Otherwise how am I ever gonna sleep?
r34skyline
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
No my rifle works the same way. Seeing that my current ar has a red dot with a 2moa dot on it this is a non issue whichever way you try to cut it. And in the past when i had the iur with a low power variable scope on it, there was zero difference in that instance... a fraction of a mm of wiggle between receivers(which would get taken up the moment you load the gun up) is not going to affect your parallax, if it does get a better scope(tbh even a pos like a vortex diamondback shouldn't have a problem with this).
Any of your misses is not attributed to this "issue", either you have a meh barrel or maybe even a good barrel long in the tooth, questionable ammo choices, if your claimed parallax claim is true a crap optic, or you plain don't know what you are doing...
Feel free to prove me wrong on this.
What cr5 said
The german G28 I had the pleasure of playing with did as well... another gun with no problems in the accuracy department... the LMT is built to be a service grade gun... at this point it should be obvious this is a non issue and the serious end users don't care about it since it has ZERO negative effects on its performance. And honestly it should also be the dead giveaway that this is nothing but whinging from a fringe group that are too lazy to just buy matching billet reveivers.
The big money for those brands usually comes from their exhaustive and highly in depth qc processes along with the top notch material and machining capabilities. And in some cases the R&D sunk into the proprietary design features such as the modular barrel for the LMT, or the piston system of the 416/7. So if they have a minor wiggle that should be a dead giveaway it's nothing to worry about.
If the wobble bugs you that much buy a matched billet set, or just buy the mdi slr... the rail interface basically means she locks up tighter than a nuns... you get the gist.
Last edited:
r34skyline
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
If your optic wobbles you need a new mount or a new optic, if the concept of loading your rifle before the shot is foreign to you, I have nothing more to tell you because that's a pretty basic part of precision shooting.
Perhaps I need to put this into a separate line so maybe for the third or 4th time I have said this, but when you load the gun up it takes the slop out. In other words it loads into position(gun has ZERO WOBBLE at this point).
And if the high speed stuff is your thing, good luck trying to prove a multi moa dot is super affected by a fractional milimeter of movement.
Dexter Morgan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
My optic DOES NOT wobble. Apparently yours does? But I can assure you that mine doesn't.
I have zero interest in shooting an AR-15 bolted to a table. (I thought I made that very clear a few pages ago?)
And if I ever did get into that style of shooting; I'm sure I would be using a proper bolt gun, not an AR.
I can shoot my rifle faster and more accurately when my optic doesn't wobble. I don't need any more "proof" than that.
An optic will not lose zero because of play between the upper and lower and a shooter's accuracy will not suffer because of play between the two. From the moment the round is chambered until the bullet is expelled from the bore, the entire thing rests within the upper receiver exclusively.
I agree with your assertion that the AR is not a precision rifle. I think those who treat it as one are really missing the point.
Last edited:
r34skyline
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Neither does mine... hence my disregarding this "issue".
Who mentioned anything about a table? Do you not load your rifle when shooting from a positional point be it sitting or prone(and odds are you've never done this but supporting it off a barricade or stop of some sort to stabilize on a longer shot)? I don't understand how this simple concept is so hard for you.
And as for this you shooting faster and more accurately when your optic doesn't "wobble" that is exactly what I'm saying. Show proof, show me the groups from one or the other, both on times and accuracy.
All I read from your post so far is you don't know how to shoot properly and think silly gimmicks make you a better shooter...
Your optic isn't wobbling, your upper receiver which is connected securely optic and to your barrel is wobbling together as a single unit. You are the one making it wobble with how you hold the rifle.
What are you doing with your support hand while firing? The same force exerted by your hand in the same direction every shot and your optic should always be in the same spot in relation to your eye regardless of the upper/lower wiggle.
I don't understand, How much movement is there between your upper and lower?
For there to be enough wobble for you to lose your sight picture from one shot to the next with your cheek weld consistent you must have a lot of play, so much that you probably need a new receiver set, I get the feeling though that is not the case and you're just making a mountain out of a mole hill. I've owned more AR's than I can remember and I've never had one with enough play to bother me while shooting or affect my ability to use my optic.
Is part of your shooting technique to twist your support hand each direction between every shot? I really can't understand why this is such a big deal for you.
If you do most of your shooting unsupported then I'd really be surprised if you could tell any difference in POI from shot to shot that couldn't just be tracked back to shooting unsupported and your wobbly arm holding the gun.
This is not a dig, I would probably have a hard time shooting a five moa 5 round group at 100 yards unsupported with any rifle no matter how accurate it can be off a bench, especially if I have been moving around and my heart rate and breathing are elevated.
Last edited:
Dexter Morgan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Yes. I have already stated several times that all of this is indeed possible.
But it's also completely unnecessary, and a total waste of time and effort.
It costs $4, and takes 4 seconds to completely eliminate any wobble.
Why would any sane person argue against such a thing?
