AR fustration

[BobInNJ 0]

Not sure how to phrase this, but I'll try. I can't get my AR to group to save my life! I have a Stag 20 in. barrel, 1-9x Redfield scope, and a 3 1/2 to 4 lb trigger. Smallest groups I've ever had are probably 5-7 MOA. Now, I know I'm not the best shooter, but I can get better groups (3-5 moa) out of a 60 yr old Garand and iron sights with a shot out muzzle. I've started reloading, and the results so far haven't been much better than mil-sup. I know that reloading rifle is a lot of hit & miss (no pun intended). I've only shot 55 gr, and the barrel is 1/9, which I think is more suited for heaver loads. BUT, I'm only shooting 100 yrds, and I've never seen a keyhole. I can't understand how I can get 5 rds in 2 in. then another 5 rds 6 or 7 inchs low & right. I hope it's me and not the equipment. Just venting, any advice is welcome.

[Jon 264]

Best bet is to find someone else going to the range the same day as you to put some rounds through the gun. That way you can isolate whether it's you or the rifle. Do you shoot off a rest? Also is it typically windy when you hit the range?

[PK90 3,570]

I vote that the scope is the problem.

 

ETA: AFAIK, Leupold purchased Redfield in 2008? and started making them similar to their VX1 version.

 

If yours is a pre-2008, more than likely it is the scope.

[BobInNJ 0]

Best bet is to find someone else going to the range the same day as you to put some rounds through the gun. That way you can isolate whether it's you or the rifle. Do you shoot off a rest? Also is it typically windy when you hit the range?

 

Benchrest, and the conditions were windy on Sat. Can a 55gr SPBT be affected that much by the wind; ie, 6 in off POA? I'll try to find someone else to shoot as well.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

I vote that the scope is the problem.

 

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[MedicYeti 96]

I'd reccomend shooting without the scope and see if you do any better. That will help you determine is it's the scope or not. Check the mounts and rings as well.

[Shane45 807]

Pull the scope, shoot the irons.

[JimmyAGR 54]

I have a lead sled that you are welcome to borrow to see if it is the rifle. You can try with irons and with the scope, but it take you out of the equation.

[Cylinder Head 22]

Pull the scope, shoot the irons.

 

This. Hold the irons on the same point, shoot shoot shoot. Profit.

[vladtepes 1,060]

when you get these groups.. are you aiming at the same spot every time you pull the trigger.. or are you chasing center hits.. if you are shooting then adjusting, stop.. just hold at the same spot and shoot 5 shots.. see where they group.. I think that everyone here will agree that the rifle is more than capable of tighter groups.. to rule out ammo.. I would take your reloads, and military surplus out of the mix and shoot some higher end ammo through it.. again just to eliminate any variables.. at any rate I doubt it's the rifle..

[JonF 79]

One time i wasted damn near 40 rounds chasing zero only to realize my rear scope mount/ring was loose and jumping around with every shot. I was getting furious thinking that a brand new target AR with a 20" bull barrel and decent glass could only produce 10 MOA. i can't say what your issue may be but sometimes its not always the most obvious thing.

[BobInNJ 0]

when you get these groups.. are you aiming at the same spot every time you pull the trigger.. or are you chasing center hits.. if you are shooting then adjusting, stop.. just hold at the same spot and shoot 5 shots.. see where they group.. I think that everyone here will agree that the rifle is more than capable of tighter groups.. to rule out ammo.. I would take your reloads, and military surplus out of the mix and shoot some higher end ammo through it.. again just to eliminate any variables.. at any rate I doubt it's the rifle..

I'm holding center on a sighting target. I did shoot a run of factory ammo to confirm (or attempt to) that the scope was zeroed, but didn't touch it after that. I did also confirm that the scope was tight in the rings, and the rings were tight on the rail. I will try to shoot irons using a bull target next.

[vladtepes 1,060]

I'm holding center on a sighting target. I did shoot a run of factory ammo to confirm (or attempt to) that the scope was zeroed, but didn't touch it after that. I did also confirm that the scope was tight in the rings, and the rings were tight on the rail. I will try to shoot irons using a bull target next.

 

 

if you are shooting good ammo... rings are tight... and it is not operator error... then it to me seems that it would be the optics without question..

[Old School 611]

I'm not familiar with your scope but do you think there may be a paralex issue? Put a piece of tape on the stock and make sure you have precise cheek weld at the same spot each time you fire.

[BobInNJ 0]

I'm not familiar with your scope but do you think there may be a paralex issue? Put a piece of tape on the stock and make sure you have precise cheek weld at the same spot each time you fire.

 

Good suggestion, I do tend to move way too much. I'll give it a try.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

I did also confirm that the scope was tight in the rings, and the rings were tight on the rail.

 

 

That's two-thirds of the equation - unless the rail is monolithic with the receiver, make sure it is tight also. Is this a new Redfield scope, or an older one (before their acquisition by Leupold)?

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[BobInNJ 0]

That's two-thirds of the equation - unless the rail is monolithic with the receiver, make sure it is tight also. Is this a new Redfield scope, or an older one (before their acquisition by Leupold)?

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

Scope is pre-Leupold, probably 15 - 20 yrs old. Got it off e-bay.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

Scope is pre-Leupold, probably 15 - 20 yrs old. Got it off e-bay.

 

 

Then my money is still on the scope being the problem. Good luck.

[Pew Pew Plates 358]

did you mount your base with a torque wrench? loc-tite the screws? did you lap your scope rings, line, loc-tite and torque the rings screws? Usually you can get away without lapping but a good scope mounting calls for lapping. your tube can be bent if you overtighten your rings or if they are far out of line.

[BobInNJ 0]

did you mount your base with a torque wrench? loc-tite the screws? did you lap your scope rings, line, loc-tite and torque the rings screws? Usually you can get away without lapping but a good scope mounting calls for lapping. your tube can be bent if you overtighten your rings or if they are far out of line.

I can honestly say that I've done none of those things. As is is, I routinely remove the scope for storage (which I know is a no-no). All that being said, I'm not shooting beyond 100 yds, and I'm getting inconsistant results. I still like the cheek weld explanation.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

I still like the cheek weld explanation.

 

 

Well, even though you like it, I hate to shoot a hole in Old Schools theory, but parallax is eliminated within the scope. He is showing how "Old School" he is if he remembers scopes where eye placement behind the scope could result in a parallax error. There may be a small degree of error, since, usually, the parallax adjustment on a 3-9x scope is fixed (non-adjustable objective lens) - I believe at 75 or 100 yards, so that shouldn't be an issue.

 

While all those things that glennp said are nice (I do disagree with using Loc-Tite on the rings, however), again, doubtful that any of those issues would result in what you are experiencing, unless the scope rings are so far out of alignment with each other you are binding the erector within the scope - but that would most likely result in a scope that would not adjust. I think that you have an internal problem. Redfields of that era were not known for their high quality (with the exception of the 3200) and you probably have one that has reached its useful life span.

 

Try all those things recommended - another shooter, removing the scope and shooting irons, or replacing the scope with one of known reliable function. You will figure it out - it is highly doubtful that it is the firearm or ammunition. Good luck.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[Old School 611]

Well, even though you like it, I hate to shoot a hole in Old Schools theory, but parallax is eliminated within the scope. He is showing how "Old School" he is if he remembers scopes where eye placement behind the scope could result in a parallax error. There may be a small degree of error, since, usually, the parallax adjustment on a 3-9x scope is fixed (non-adjustable objective lens) - I believe at 75 or 100 yards, so that shouldn't be an issue.

 

While all those things that glennp said are nice (I do disagree with using Loc-Tite on the rings, however), again, doubtful that any of those issues would result in what you are experiencing, unless the scope rings are so far out of alignment with each other you are binding the erector within the scope - but that would most likely result in a scope that would not adjust. I think that you have an internal problem. Redfields of that era were not known for their high quality (with the exception of the 3200) and you probably have one that has reached its useful life span.

 

Try all those things recommended - another shooter, removing the scope and shooting irons, or replacing the scope with one of known reliable function. You will figure it out - it is highly doubtful that it is the firearm or ammunition. Good luck.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

 

Bob- I consider you a sage of sorts and you always provide such sound opinions but you're WRONG! Modern scopes especially the new China babies and many older scopes will chang POI if you move your eye perpedicular to the line of sight, some more some less. Bench rest shooters are big on putting tape or even a tack on there stocks to maintain cheek weld consistantly.

 

Hey junior, you can try this at home. Sand bag up your rifle REAL solid, don't touch it, and look though the scope. Have someone put a mark on the wall where the crosshairs intesect. Go back to your rifle look through the scope and move your head left and right across the line of sight. See if the cross hairs move off the mark.

 

They should ban scopes for the first three years of shooting. Consistant cheek weld is a basic skill best learned with aperature sights.

 

Yes Bob I have alot of old school ideas. Harry Truman was president when I was born. But sometimes I think those were better times. Basics!!

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

Bob- I consider you a sage of sorts and you always provide such sound opinions but you're WRONG! Modern scopes especially the new China babies and many older scopes will chang POI if you move your eye perpedicular to the line of sight, some more some less. Bench rest shooters are big on putting tape or even a tack on there stocks to maintain cheek weld consistantly.

 

 

Frank:

 

While I certainly agree with you on "Basics", you shoot yourself in the foot in the second sentence - Chinese scopes and Older Scopes - which indicates there is something wrong with the scope, which is what I've been saying all along. A good quality, modern scope, with either fixed parallax or an AO for parallax should not change POA with your eye position - those that do, as you so ably pointed out, are usually old or low quality. On a 3-9X you may see a slight parallax error, due to the fixed parallax correction - but it should be insignificant at the distance he is shooting and the size groups he's getting.

 

As for Benchresters, they do anything they can to eliminate ALL variables. While consistent cheek weld was important to them for parallax reasons when they were using Unertls and such with external adjustments at the rings, now it is just a matter of consistency. Where you place your cheek on the stock can change the harmonics, etc, etc. They are dealing with thousandths of inches, so ANY inconsistency can affect accuracy and group size.

 

Round 3?

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[Old School 611]

I will not rescind my position. And at least be nice to me until you get the check.

[Shane45 807]

I think the issue is the scope or mount but a few thoughts. Parralax is easy enough to test. Sight in. Move your eye up a tiny bit, down, right, and left. If the ret or target move without the scope/rifle moving, you have a parallax issue. The consistant cheek weld is important to accuracy but I dont think its whats going on here. A consistant cheek weld in a bad position wont help much, its only part of the story. You must have an optically centered, parallax free, center of eye box, edge to edge clarity-no shadow, NPA, picture for an ideal sight picture. My money is on the scope internals have gone to mush and the ret is jumping around. If you shoot irons and the groups shrink dramatically, then you know its in the optics system somewhere. Try taping on the scope while looking through it and see if you can catch the ret jumping.

[Shane45 807]

PS. The diff between a chicom or old scope and a top shelf scope is the quality scope has an adjustment for parallax instead of just accepting the parralax set into it at the factory. The imprtance of parralax increases with magnification. IIRC this is a lower power scope which also would imply parallax is not the issue.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Scope is pre-Leupold, probably 15 - 20 yrs old. Got it off e-bay.

 

 

Then my money is still on the scope being the problem. Good luck.

 

 

with that last piece of info added I am going to side with the scope actually being bad as well.. you have NO idea how tortured that thing was prior to your use.. low quality scope.. how powered bolt gun... it may literally just be beat from the inside out.. the quality of your shooting will only reach to the highest quality of items you are using.. you are not going to shoot 1inch groups with a shot out AK utilizing a airsoft grade scope.. it is just not going to happen.. and while I am not familiar with the specific optic you have.. from what others say I am really leaning towards it just being beat and unreliable..

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

I will not rescind my position. And at least be nice to me until you get the check.

 

 

Kind of a bite the hand that feeds sort of thing.

[Shane45 807]

Has this AR ever shot a decent group? :thsmiley_deadhorse: Irons or another scope need to be utilized to identify the optics system as the culprit. If it isnt, there could be a barrel issue such as an improperly interfaced and torqued barrel nut or a seriously bad barrel.

[Old School 611]

Has this AR ever shot a decent group? :thsmiley_deadhorse: Irons or another scope need to be utilized to identify the optics system as the culprit. If it isnt, there could be a barrel issue such as an improperly interfaced and torqued barrel nut or a seriously bad barrel.

 

You're so right Shane!! Too many variables at this point. Not like Pizza Bob... BTW Bob I mailed the check.

 

Is it a factory assembled upper or a frankenstein?

 

I'm getting tired of this, Just bring me the rifle and I'll take it to the range. Done!!!