New Sniper fall out

[Sir Krustin]

Hmm, lets see Sir T, Sir Kenyth and myself...we all are avid gun nuts. Anyone else see a trend here?

Originally posted by Sir Kenyth: The .223 in. or 5.74 mm. caliber round is one of the most accurate loads around. It's a small light round that travels extremely fast. It's relatively flat trajectory gives it a very long range and little drift or drop. This is a long range round meant for hunting skittish varmints on the ranch, and also used by our military. A moderate marksman can easily hit targets at 300 meters with open sites. A good tuned scope can make this 600-800 meters for an accomplished marksman. A very scary round in the hands of a madman!

Well the Senior FBI weapons Expert they interviewd on the radio today disagrees with your assessment [img]smile.gif[/img] and I will agree that the .223 is a flat shooting round, but it is only really flat out to 100 to 200 meters. I did mention that I used a Remmington model 700 bolt action .223 for groundhogs and the occasional Turkey on the farm. I was good out to 250 yards or so with it. I've done some research and no one seriously expects to use the .223 at 600 or 800 meter ranges since the bullet is so light its likly to be deflected into the next county by the windage. Which is a reason that the heavier .308 round is considered much superior to the .223 in 800 meter shooting (which by the way, only a couple of dozen people in the world are really any good at. (800 meter = roughly 2400 feet = roughly half a mile) Not many people can hit a target at half a mile in or out of the military.

If as you say the .223 is 5.74mm then I was correct in assuming the moron showing the Ak-47 or 74 was showing a weapon that is NOT chambered for .223 since the AK-74 is 5.45mm

[Sir Krustin]

Originally posted by MagiK: Which is a reason that the heavier .308 round is considered much superior to the .223 in 800 meter shooting (which by the way, only a couple of dozen people in the world are really any good at. (800 meter = roughly 2400 feet = roughly half a mile) Not many people can hit a target at half a mile in or out of the military.

I would disagree with that statement. 800m is a long, long, shot but many hunters spend lots of time and effort trying for the perfect shot, and many are capable of truly impressive feats of accuracy.

Not to brag, but me and a lot of my hunter friends hunt wolf, on the run, with .243 and .270 (admittedly hotter than .223) at ranges out to 800 meters.

If as you say the .223 is 5.74mm then I was correct in assuming the moron showing the Ak-47 or 74 was showing a weapon that is NOT chambered for .223 since the AK-74 is 5.45mm

The 5.45mm is definitely a distinct caliber from the .223; the AK-47 on the other hand fires a 7.62mm round with the exact same caliber as the NATO .308; however the cartridge is much shorter.

[ 10-17-2002, 09:53 PM: Message edited by: Sir Krustin ]

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by ladyzekke: I know Sir T, either that *witness* was purposely lying for some FREAK reason, or he is a total idiot, who knows which! The police are contemplating charging him, with what I don't know, whether they will actually do it or not I also don't know, guess we'll see. I'd like to know more about what he said though, to be able to get an idea if he was just slighly mistaken, nearsighted maybe, looking for fame and attention and just making stuff up, misleading on purpose, or what. I haven't heard any actual details yet about what he said all together.

According to the evening news, Lady Z, this guy was the one who gave the detail of the "broken taillight" and also provided a rough, physical description of the sniper - who he claimed was IN the parking lot and only 40yds away from the victim.

This led police to announce they had received their "best lead to date". Now they have learned that the guy was inside the Home Depot and would have had trouble seeing the sniper even if had been standing right outside the door. One of the reporters also was "reporting live" from the parking lot shortly after dusk. He had the camera pull back 40yds and explained that these were the exact same lighting conditions that were existent at the time of the last shooting. Needless to say, it was IMPOSSIBLE to discern any details about him - other than a rough guess at height and weight.

According to the news reports, this "false witness" is an ex-con that just wanted to have his "15 minutes of fame".

[Sir Taliesin]

Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Sir Kenyth: The .223 in. or 5.74 mm. caliber round is one of the most accurate loads around. It's a small light round that travels extremely fast. It's relatively flat trajectory gives it a very long range and little drift or drop. This is a long range round meant for hunting skittish varmints on the ranch, and also used by our military. A moderate marksman can easily hit targets at 300 meters with open sites. A good tuned scope can make this 600-800 meters for an accomplished marksman. A very scary round in the hands of a madman!

Well the Senior FBI weapons Expert they interviewd on the radio today disagrees with your assessment [img]smile.gif[/img] and I will agree that the .223 is a flat shooting round, but it is only really flat out to 100 to 200 meters. I did mention that I used a Remmington model 700 bolt action .223 for groundhogs and the occasional Turkey on the farm. I was good out to 250 yards or so with it. I've done some research and no one seriously expects to use the .223 at 600 or 800 meter ranges since the bullet is so light its likly to be deflected into the next county by the windage. Which is a reason that the heavier .308 round is considered much superior to the .223 in 800 meter shooting (which by the way, only a couple of dozen people in the world are really any good at. (800 meter = roughly 2400 feet = roughly half a mile) Not many people can hit a target at half a mile in or out of the military.

If as you say the .223 is 5.74mm then I was correct in assuming the moron showing the Ak-47 or 74 was showing a weapon that is NOT chambered for .223 since the AK-74 is 5.45mm[/QUOTE]Magik, I have to disagree about the accuray of the .223. With the right rifle it is a very accurate round out to 800 meters. Many people that shoot in Service Matches such as Camp Perry in Ohio, shoot the AR15. Of course, they build a match grade weapon. I have seen them shot accurately, from 1000 meters as well. BTW that was with iron sights at a bullseye the size of a average mans chest.

There are a lot more people than you think that can shot at these sorts of ranges. When I was shooting in competetions with the military, we would shoot agains military and civilian marksmen (and women) alike. The field was typically at least 50 people and usually more like 200 people and that was just here local in the state of Tennessee.

The .308 is in the process of being phased out of the military, in favor of the .300 Win Mag. The .223 will never be a sniper rifle in the military, but it is used quite extensively by police departments for sniping duty. It's less likely to over penetrate and kill an innocent bystander.

Sorry got off topic again. I apologize Timber.

[Neb]

Originally posted by Sir Krustin: [QB] Not to brag, but me and a lot of my hunter friends hunt wolf,

You hunt wolves? Why? They're peaceful and beautiful creatures

[Sir Taliesin]

Originally posted by Neb: quote: Originally posted by Sir Krustin: [QB] Not to brag, but me and a lot of my hunter friends hunt wolf,

You hunt wolves? Why? They're peaceful and beautiful creatures [/QUOTE]Not if your a farmer, or cattle/sheep rancher! They find penned up livestock easy pickings. I would assume Canada has a season on wolf hunting. I think the State of Alaska has one or if they don't then the State hunts them to keep the population down. Much like the African countries thin out their Elephant herds.

JEEZ! We got WAY [img]graemlins/offtopic.gif[/img] with this!!!

[ 10-18-2002, 12:31 PM: Message edited by: Sir Taliesin ]

[Neb]

Originally posted by Sir Taliesin: quote: Originally posted by Neb: You hunt wolves? Why? They're peaceful and beautiful creatures

Not if your a farmer, or cattle/sheep rancher! They find penned up livestock easy pickings. I would assume Canada has a season on wolf hunting. I think the State of Alaska has one or if they don't then the State hunts them to keep the population down. Much like the African countries thin out their Elephant herds.

JEEZ! We got WAY [img]graemlins/offtopic.gif[/img] with this!!![/QUOTE]I'd rather let a couple of wolves devour a few sheep/cows than shoot them. Even if the livestock were my livelihood. Wolves are in my opinion so intelligent and beautiful that I'd be tempted to put a ban on killing them if I was in power, unless of course their numbers were threatening the populations of other creatures dramatically.

[Thoran]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Are you sure it was an AK47? I heard they suspect the shooter is using an AK74, which fires a .223 round that is longer than the one common to NATO. I don't remember what an AK74 looks like, maybe like the 47? And you're right - the AK47 fires a 7.63 round - again, different than NATOs. Plus they don't shoot very straight. Which has me wondering about the news that they suspect him to be using an AK74. Does anyone out there know how accurate the 74 is?

Having shot AK-47's on numerous occasions I can say with certainty that our sniper isn't shooting one. [img]smile.gif[/img]

they're a great design, VERY reliable... but they get that reliability at the cost of accuracy. If you ever see one, pick it up and shake it... they rattle as bad as a 70's era american car.

He's probably using a nice bolt action Remington with a good scope, the idiots on the news automatically assume he's got some damn full auto military rifle or something equally scarry looking... yet all he's ever taken is a single shot. Snipers DON'T NEED full auto... or even semi auto for that matter. All a good sniper needs is a high quality barrel and somthing to get the bullet started.

[ 10-18-2002, 01:49 PM: Message edited by: Thoran ]

[Ronn_Bman]

Originally posted by Neb: I'd rather let a couple of wolves devour a few sheep/cows than shoot them. Even if the livestock were my livelihood. Wolves are in my opinion so intelligent and beautiful that I'd be tempted to put a ban on killing them if I was in power, unless of course their numbers were threatening the populations of other creatures dramatically.

They wouldn't devour a "few" caged animals, they would devour them all. This would threaten the population of the caged animals "dramatically"... [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 10-18-2002, 01:59 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]